tihvavy  of  t1\e  t:heolo0icd  ^^mimxy 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


PRESENTED  BY 

Rufus  H.   LeFevre 


ia^'Mxj.Aug'JuStis  P^ahniia .T. 


THE    DOCTRI 


—  OF 


Universal  Restoration 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED. 


—  BY' 


v/ 


BISHOP  J.  WEAVER,  D.  D. 


**He  that  believeth   and  is  baptized sJtall  he  saved;  but  he  thai   believetk 
fiUfi  sJiall  be  d^unned?'     Mark  xvi.  i6. 


DAYTON,   OHIO: 

UNITED  BRETHREN  PUBLISHING  HOUSE. 

1878. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1878, 

BY  REV.  W.  J.  SHUEY, 

In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington,  D.  C. 


CONTENTS. 

PAGE. 

Preface ,  6 

Introduction 9 

CHAPTER  I. 
Proposition II 

CHAPTER  n. 
Holiness 23 

CHAPTER  HI. 
Salvation 39 

CHAPTER  IV. 
God  the  author  of  sin 51 

CHAPTER  V. 
Depravity  and  regeneration 62 

CHAPTER  VI. 
The  divinity  of  Christ ,        79 

CHAPTER  VII. 
Vicarious  atonement 98 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Pardon,  remission,  justification Il6 

CHAPTER  IX. 
Life  a  probation,  man  a  moral  agent 134 

CHAPTER  X. 
All  punishment  corrective ..•»..*..•••      158 


IV  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  XI. 
God's  attributes,  their  harmony  and  perfection i8i 

CHAPTER  Xn. 
The  second  coming  of  Christ 202 

CHAPTER  Xni. 
A  distinction  of  character  in  the  resurrection 218 

CHAPTER  XIV. 
A  future  general  judgment 237 

CHAPTER  XV. 

The  righteous  and  the  wicked  separated  at  the  day  of 
judgment 255 

CHAPTER  XVI. 
The  future  state  of  the  wicked 267 

CHAPTER  XVII 
The  future  state  of  the  wicked — continued 288 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 
The  rich  man,  Lazarus,  and  Judas 303 

CHAPTER  XIX. 
Hades,  sheol,  Gehenna 318 

CHAPTER  XX. 
Sin  an  infinite  evil 332 

CHAPTER  XXI. 
Bible  doctrine  concerning  the  devil 341 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

Brief  comments  on  the  principal  texts  of  scripture, 
usually  relied  upon  by  Universalists  to  prove  their 
doctrine ....; 356 


PREFACE. 


For  a  number  of  years  past  my  attention,  in  one  way  and 
another,  has  been  directed  to  that  system  of  belief  denomi- 
nated Universalism ;  or,  Universal  Restoration.  I  have  ex- 
amined a  number  of  libraries,  private  and  public,  but  have 
never  found  a  book  that  pursued  that  course  of  reasoning 
which  to  my  mind  most  successfully  exposed  the  errors  in 
that  system. 

Books  against  Universalism  have  been  written ;  many  of 
them  very  able  in  their  way  of  treating  the  subject.  If  they 
failed  in  anything  it  was  in  not  presenting  the  "  theology  of 
Universalism,"  as  taught  by  its  authors,  in  a  clear  and  full 
light.  We  can  best  judge  of  the  truth  or  falsity  of  a  system 
when  we  know  the  principles  upon  which  it  rests.  Universal- 
ism claims  to  be  "a  system  of  divinity— a  tree  of  life."  I 
have  examined  a  number  of  books  written  by  Universalist 
authors,  and  from  them  I  have  obtained  their  system  of  be- 
lief. In  this  review  of  the  doctrine  of  Universalism  I  have 
stated  clearly  and  distinctly  their  theory,  and  then  my  objec- 
tions. This  will  bring  before  the  mind  and  eye  of  the 
reader  the  "theology  of  Universalism,"  and  the  theology 
of  the  evangelical  churches.  It  is  not  pretended 
that  all  the  arguments  in  this  book  are  original  with 
the  author.  Many  of  them  have  appeared  in  various  forms, 
but   not   in  the  order  in  which  they  are  presented  in  this 


VI  PREFACE. 

book.     I  have  not,  however,  intentionally  used  any  man's 
language  without  giving  credit. 

It  will  only  be  just  to  myself  to  say  that  I  have  only  had 
fragments  of  time  which  I  could  devote  to  the  preparation 
of  this  book  ;  being  constantly  pressed  with  other  duties 
and  responsibilities,  which  were  altogether  foreign  to  that 
of  book-making.  I  trust,  however,  that  under  God  the  ear- 
nest inquirer  after  truth  may  find  much  in  this  unpretending 
volume  to  strengthen  his  faith  in  the  great  and  fundamental 
doctrines  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  competent 
critic  will  no  doubt  find  many  defects  in  this  book  ;  but 
perfection  is  not  claimed.  The  most  that  is  claimed  is  this: 
a  plain  man  in  a  plain  way  presenting  plain  truth. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Upon  all  questions  relating  to  our  future  life  we  have  but 
one  source  of  definite  and  trustworthy  information.  '•'Man 
dieth  and  wasteth  away;  yea,  man  giveth  up  the  ghost,  and 
where  is  he  ?"  In  the  word  of  God  alone  is  found  an  an- 
swer to  this  ancient  and  most  important  question.  Science 
tells  us  many  precious  truths  respecting  this  life,  but  noth- 
ing respecting  the  life  to  come.  She  stands  profoundly 
silent  at  the  grave  of  mortals,  with  her  light,  so  luminous 
along  the  whole  path  of  life,  casting  not  a  ray  beyond  the 
tomb. 

If  we  consult  human  experience,  we  shall  meet  with  no 
better  success.  Into  every  realm  of  human  endeavor  shines 
the  light  of  human  experience,  in  every  duty  is  its  aid  af- 
forded ;  but  upon  the  shore  of  time  mortals  can  not  stand 
and,  with  the  telescope  of  experience,  peer  out  upon  the 
eternal  ocean  which  lies  beyond.  No  one  has  ever  launch- 
ed out  into  that  rr.ysterious  realm,  and  brought  back  to  our 
eager  ears  the  story  of  his  experience.  All  the  lessons  of 
experience  known  in  this  life  relate  to  this  life. 

If  we  turn  to  reason,  we  shall  find  our  anxieties  awakened 
and  stimulated,  but  not  satisfied.  Reason  points  with  in- 
definite finger  to  a  future  existence  for  man,  but  it  discov- 
ers nothing  respecting  the  condition  of  that  existence. 
In  regard  to  the  condition  of  that  future  life,  and  the  in- 


VIU  INTRODUCTION. 

fluence  of  human  conduct  in  determining  or  affecting  that 
life,  reason  has  nothing  of  certainty  to  declare. 

Wherever  we  turn  all  is  silence  and  darkness  respecting 
the  hereafter,  until  upon  our  darkened  vision  the  light  of 
revelation  shines.  By  this,  and  by  this  alone,  may  we  learn 
of  the  future  world  to  which  we  are  all  hastening,  and  of 
our  liabilities  and  possibilities  in  that  future  world. 

Having  therefore  no  other  source  of  information,  respect- 
ing either  the  future  life  or  its  relation  to  the  present  life, 
God's  word  alone  should  be  the  man  of  our  counsel  and  the 
ground  of  our  faith.  To  all  its  declarations  we  should  give 
attention,  accepting  them  without  doubt  or  hesitation.  As 
the  scientist  looks  into  nature,  so  should  we  look  into  revel- 
ation— to  discover  what  is  there  taught.  The  true  scientist 
accepts  the  truths  discovered  in  the  realm  of  his  researches, 
however  fatal  they  may  be  to  his  own  pre-conceived  opin- 
ions or  speculations.  The  mechanic  measures  a  stick  of 
timber,  not  to  determine  how  long  and  thick  he  desires  it  to 
be,  but  to  discover  how  long  and  thick  it  actually  is.  No 
preference  or  opinion  or  necessity  of  his  own  is  permitted 
to  influence  his  decision  in  the  least.  In  a  like  spirit  of 
passive  recipiency  should  we  study  the  word  of  God.  With 
strictest  care  should  we  guard  against  the  folly  and  wicked- 
ness of  injecting  into  its  declarations  any  of  our  own  pref- 
erences or  opinions. 

Nor  may  we  with  wisdom  turn  away  from  or  close  our 
hearts  against  any  unwelcome  declarations  of  scripture. 
Our  fallen  nature  is  sadly  unfitted  to  respond  joyfully  to  the 
awful  truths  of  God.  Experience  proves  that  we  instinct- 
ively turn  away  from  all  unpleasant  truths  ;  but  in  temporal 
matters  we  do  not  follow  these  promptings  of  our  nature. 
In  every  sphere  of  worldly  endeavor  men  consider  careful- 


INTRODUCTION.  IX 

ly  the  liabilities  and  dangers  they  must  meet.     We  should 
not  be  less  prudent  in  matters  of  eternal  moment. 

The  importance  of  this  thought  may  be  more  manifest 
when  we  remember  that  the  truths  of  revelation,  like  those 
of  nature,  are  facts  entirely  and  forever  unaffected  by  our 
acceptance  or  denial.  "Though  ye  believe  not,  yet  he 
remaineth  faithful:  he  can  not  be  false  to  himself."  Ahab 
and  Jehoshaphat  turned  wrathfuUy  away  from  the  unwel- 
come prophecy  of  Micaiah,  and  cast  the  faithful  prophet 
into  prison  ;  but  they  only  rushed  into  the  ruin  he  proclaim- 
ed, and  to  which  they  closed  their  infatuated  eyes.  There 
may  be  a  rock  in  our  path,  and  by  closing  our  eyes  against 
it,  by  refusing  to  see  it,  we  may  be  hurled  to  death  against 
its  unyielding  form.  We  may  deny  the  existence  of  a 
fearful  precipice  that  yawns  just  before  us,  until  we  are 
dashed  to  pieces  at  its  rocky  depths.  What  is  thus  so  man- 
ifestly true  in  nature  is  equally  so  in  spiritual  matters. 
Truth  is  entirely  and  forever  unaffected  by  our  faith  or  un- 
belief. The  result  of  our  denial  of  any  of  the  stern  decla- 
rations of  the  Bible  will  be  our  sad  realization  of  their  truth- 
fulness. Millions  of  denials  can  not  remove  nor  in  anywise 
change  one  revealed  truth. 

We  should  also  remember  that  the  Bible  does  not  create  but 
declares  truth.  It  is  a  revelation — a  revelation  of  truth.  When 
the  Bible  declares,  "The  wicked  shall  be  turned  into  hell,"  it 
is  not  so  declared  that  it  may  be  true,  but  because  it  is  true. 
As  the  watchman,  with  his  glaring  red  light,  warns  the  flying 
train  of  danger,  because  a  bridge  has  been  swept  away,  so 
God  in  his  infinite  mercy  warns  man  of  the  awful  consequences 
of  sin.  The  Bible  does  not  create  those  awful  consequences, 
but  kindly  points  them  out.  I  once  heard  a  Universal- 
ist  preacher  say,   "If  I  believed  in  future  endless  punish- 


X  INTRODUCTION. 

ment,  I  should  hate  the  Bible!"  How  manifestly  unrea- 
sonable !  Do  we  not  rather  love  and  cherish  the  faithful 
friend  who  cries  out  to  us  of  any  great  danger  to  which 
we  are  exposed  ?  Far  more  wise,  as  all  must  admit,  is  this 
statement :  "  If  I  am  in  danger  of  being  forever  lost  I  can 
never  cease  to  be  thankful  to  God  for  warning  me  of  that 
danger." 

We  should  examine  this  subject  with  the  greatest  possible 
care.  We  can  better  afford  to  lightly  consider  any  other 
subject.  The  learned  Dr.  Hawes  has  wisely  said  :  "  If  there 
be  but  one  chance  in  a  million  of  our  falling  into  a  misera- 
ble eternity,  and  there  be  any  means  by  which  that  chance 
may  be  lessened,  he  is  an  infatuated  man  who  does  not  at- 
tend to  them." 

I  commend  this  volume,  because  it  is  a  faithful  and  can- 
did appeal  to  the  word  of  God.  It  presents  to  us,  in  their 
own  words,  the  teachings  of  Universalist  authors,  and  com- 
pares those  teachings  with  the  plain  truths  of  the  Bible.  It 
is  the  product  of  many  years  of  careful  study.  Its  author, 
having  engaged  in  several  public  discussions  with  distin- 
guished Universalists,  is  able  to  speak  understandingly  of 
their  doctrines.  The  work  is  adapted,  by  its  clearness  of 
argument  and  simplicity  of  language,  to  the  minds  of  the 
masses.  May  the  blessings  of  God  so  attend  it,  that  mul- 
titudes who  peruse  its  pages  shall  take  warning  and  flee 
from  the  wrath  to  come. 

E.  S.  CHAPMAN. 


Universal  Restoration. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Proposition. — "Do  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments teach  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men  ?  " 

All  questions  whicli  relate  to  the  future  exist- 
ence of  man  must  be  settled  by  a  direct  appeal  to 
the  word  of  God.  Men  may  speculate  and  theo- 
rize about  the  hereafter,  but  at  last  they  must 
come  to  the  Scriptures  for  a  satisfactory  solution. 
"  If  a  man  die,  shall  he  live  again  ? "  Is  the  soul 
immortal,  or  does  it  die  with  the  body?  Is  the 
future  destiny  of  man  directly  or  indirectly  af- 
fected by  what  he  may  do  in  this  life?  Is  man 
a  moral  agent?  Is  sin  predicable  of  matter  or 
mind?  These  are  questions  of  vast  importance, 
and  can  only  be  settled  by  the  word  of  God. 
Of  the  millions  of  our  race  who  have  gone  away 
from  us,  not  one  has  returned  to  tell  us  what 
there  is  bevond  this  life.  All  nations,  whether 
civilized  or  uncivilized,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bond 


12  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

or  free,  have  very  generally  believed  that  there 
was  something  remaining  for  man  after  this  life. 
But  no  man,  however  learned  he  may  have  been, 
has  ever  been  able  to  go  beyond  the  veil  and 
give  a  satisfactory  answer  to  the  ten  thousand 
questions  which  are  continually  suggested  to  the 
mind.  We  must  look  to  the  word  of  God  for 
an  answer ;  if  it  is  not  to  be  found  there,  it  can 
not  be  found   anywhere. 

The  doctrine  of  Universal  Restoration — as  set 
forth  in  the  proposition  at  the  head  of  thi«  chap- 
ter— we  propose  to  investigate  in  the  light  of 
divine  revelation.  And  here  the  question  to  be 
considered  is  not  what  men  may  desire,  think, 
or  believe,  bat,  "Do  the  scriptures  of  the  Old 
and  I*^ew  Testaments  teach  the  ultimate  holiness 
and  salvation  of  all  men?"  All  Christians  will 
agree  that  the  Scriptures  teach,  in  unmistakable 
language,  that  all  who  believe  and  obey  the  gos- 
pel of  Christ  will  ultimately  be  holy  and  happy. 
But  this  is  not  the  point  in  controversy.  The 
question  when  reduced  to  the  last  analysis  is 
this,  ''Do  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  'New 
Testaments  teach  the  ultimate  holiness  and  sal- 
vation of  those  who  live  and  die  in  sin?"  If 
the  Scriptures  teach  this,  then  they  must  also 
teach,  when,  where,  and  by  what  means  they  will 
be  made  holy.     If  it  be  said  that  they  shall  be 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  13 

made  holy  in  death,  then,  by  what  means  ? 
Will  the  mere  dissolution  of  the  body  change 
the  moral  character  of  the  soul?  If  it  be  said, 
they  shall  be  made  holy  in  the  resurrection, 
then  we  ask  again,  by  what  means?  Will  the 
mere  physical  power  of  God,  exerted  in  the  res- 
urrection of  the  body,  purify  the  soul  ?  Does 
the  word  resurrection  imply  that  anything  more 
will  be  raised  up  than  dies?  This  would  nat- 
urally suggest  another  question  :  What  becomes 
of  the  soul  between  the  death  and  resurrection 
of  the  body?  Of  necessity,  it  must  be  some- 
where. Where  is  it,  and  what  is  its  condition? 
In  the  investigation  of  the  "  Theology  of  Uni- 
versalism,"  it  will  be  necessary  to  notice  partic- 
ularly that  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation 
of  all  men,  as  affirmed  by  the  advocates  of  this 
doctrine,  does  not  rest  upon  the  interpretation 
of  a  few  passages  of  Scripture,  but  upon  a  sys- 
tem of  doctrine  differing  widely  from  that  held 
and  taught  by  the  great  body  of  evangelical 
Christians.  It  involves  a  denial  of  the  doctrine 
of  depravity,  the  moral  agency  of  man,  justifi- 
cation by  faith,  regeneration,  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  vicarious  atonement,  and  a  future  gen- 
eral judgment.  If  these  fundamental  doctrines 
be  true,  then  the  doctrine  of  Universalism  can 
not  be   true.     It   is    our  purpose  to   show  that 


14  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

TJniversalism  is  in  direct  conflict  with  the  plain 
teaching  of  God's  word. 

That  there  may  be  a  clear  and  distinct  un- 
derstanding of  the  proposition  we  propose  to 
investigate,  we  will  state  it  in  the  following  or- 
der: If  the  Scriptures  teach  the  ultimate  holi- 
ness and  salvation  of  all  men  they  must,  in  clear 
and  unmistakable  terms,  teach  one  of  five  things : 
First,  that  all  men  are  made  holy  in  this  life; 
or,  second,  that  all  who  are  not  made  holy  in 
this  life  Avill  be  made  holy  in  death;  or,  third, 
those  who  are  not  made  holy  in  this  life,  nor  in 
death,  will  be  made  holy  in  the  resurrection; 
or,  fourth,  all  who  are  not  made  holy  in  this 
life,  nor  in  death,  nor  in  the  resurrection,  will 
be  made  holy  between  the  death  and  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body;  or,  fifth,  that  all  who  are  not 
made  holy  in  this  life,  nor  in  death,  nor  in  the 
resurrection,  nor  between  the  death  and  resur- 
rection of  the  body,  will  be  made  holy  some- 
time after  the  resurrection.  I  can  think  of  no 
other  possible  supposition.  But  do  the  Script- 
ures anywhere  teach  that  all  men  will  be  made 
holy,  either  here  or  hereafter?  Universalists 
themselves,  as  we  shall  hereafter  show,  admit 
that  men  die  in  their  sins.  We  do  not  wish  to 
anticipate  a  subsequent  argument,  but  will  afiirm 
in   this   connection   that    there    is   not    a    single 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  15 

passage  in  the  Bible  whicli  teaches  that  any 
man  Avill  be  made  holy  after  this  life.  Affirma- 
tions supported  by  a  process  of  fallacious  rea- 
soning are  not  enough  to  prove  the  ultimate 
holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men.  The  Bible 
must  teach  it  in  language  so  plain  that  the 
wayfaring  man,  though  a  fool,  shall  not  be  mis- 
taken. 

In  matters  that  relate  wholly  to  this  life  we 
can,  perhaps,  aflbrd  to  be  mistaken;  but  in  ques- 
tions which  involve  the  endless  destiny  of  an 
immortal  soul  we  can  not  attbrd  to  run  any 
risk.  If  there  ever  was  a  question  of  solemn 
moment  submitted  for  the  consideration  of  man, 
it  is  that  whicli  relates  to  his  future  destiny. 
The  Bible  is  allowed  to  be  a  plain  book,  es- 
pecially in  that  which  relates  to  the  salvation  of 
the  soul.  But  if  the  doctrine  of  the  Universal 
Restoration  of  all  men  be  true,  the  great  ma- 
jority of  Bible  readers  have  been  led  astray; 
the  sacred  writers,  and  even  Christ  himself,  em- 
ployed such  terms,  and  used  such  figures  and 
illustrations,  that  thousands  of  the  best  men  and 
ablest  scholars  the  world  has  ever  had  have 
been  deceived,  and  led  into  error  on  all  the 
fundamental  doctrines  now  held  and  taught  by 
evangelical  churches ;  men  who  have  read  the 
Bible  through  on  their  knees,  and  prayed  daily 


16  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

for  light  to  understand  the  sacred  truth,  and  in 
the  end  died  in  the  fulhiess  of  hope,  were  all 
false  teachers,  blind  leaders  of  the  blind,  if  the 
doctrine  of  Universalism  be  true. 

It  will  be  proper  also  to  notice,  in  this  open- 
.ng  chapter,  that  the  doctrine  of  Universalism 
has  undergone  several  radical  changes.  It  was 
one  thing  under  John  Murray,  another  thing 
under  Mr.  Winchester,  and  quite  another  thing 
under  Hosea  Ballon.  The  advocates  of  this 
strange  doctrine  are  not,  and  never  were,  agreed 
on  fundamental  principles;  and  many  of  their 
authors  and  teachers  are  altogether  uncertain  as 
to  the  time  when  this  Universal  Restoration  is 
to  take  place.  I  will  give  a  few  extracts  from 
their  ablest  advocates. 

Walter  Balfour,  in  his  Inquiry,  pages  54,  55, 
80,  81,  and  140,  plainly  denies  the  immortality 
of  the  soul.  He  says,  "The  Scriptures  which 
the  Jews  had  in  their  hands  were  opposed  to 
such  a  popular  opinion,  for  they  taught  nothing 
about  immortal  souls."  Again  he  says,  "The 
Scriptures  nowhere  speak  about  an  immortal, 
immaterial  soul."  Dr.  Priestly,  in  his  Letters 
on  Revealed  Religion,  says  that  "man  was 
made  wholly — and  not  in  part  only — of  the  dust 
of  the  ground."  Hosea  Ballon,  in  his  Lectures, 
page    369,    teaches     the    same    sentiment.     Mr. 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  17 

Pingree,  in  his  debate  with  Mr.  Rice,  says  that 
the  soul  is  something  more  than  mortal,  but 
could  not  tell  what  that  something  more  was. 
Mr.  Eogers,  in  his  Pro  and  Con  of  Universalism, 
does  not  pretend  to  know  whether  the  soul  is 
immortal  or  not.  He  thinks  there  are  some 
passages  of  scripture*  which  seem  to  favor  the 
doctrine  of  the  soul's  immortality.  From  these 
extracts  it  is  evident  that  they  are  not  at  all 
agreed  respecting  the  immateriality  of  the  soul. 
Mr.  Murray  believed  in  the  divinity  of  Christ, 
and  punishment  after  death.  Mr.  Ballou  re- 
modeled the  system ;  denied  the  divinity  of  Christ 
and  all  future  punishment.  Mr.  Pingree,  in  his 
debate  with  Mr.  Rice,  page  290,  says:  "Some 
Universalists  believe  in  a  limited  punishment 
after  death,  and  others  do  not."  Some  believe 
that  a  full  and  perfect  retribution  takes  place 
in  this  world,  and  others  maintain  that  a  just 
retribution  does  not  take  place  in  time.  Hosea 
Ballou  taught  that  all  men  would  be  made  holy 
in  the  resurrection.  Rev.  Paul  Dean  taught 
that  in  the  resurrection  some  will  come  forth 
to  shame,  and  be  sent  back  to  punishment.  Mr. 
Winchester  believed  that  some  would  be  pun- 
ished perhaps  for  millions  of  years.  Mr.  Pin- 
gree believed  that  all  would  be  made  holy  in 
the  resurrection.     Thus  we  have  Unitarians  and 


18  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

Trinitarians — some  who  believe  in  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul,  and  some  who  do  not.  Some 
believe  in  a  future  general  judgment,  and  others 
do  not.  Some  teach  that  all  will  be  made  holy 
in  the  resurrection,  and  others  say  it  may  not 
be  for  millions  of  years.  Mr.  Page,  in  an  ar- 
ticle in  the  Encyclopedia  of  Religious  Knowl- 
edge, says :  "  A  difference  of  opinion  in  regard 
to  the  duration  of  punishment  has  not  disturbed 
the  harmony  of  the  denomination  generally,  nor 
is  it  regarded  as  sufficient  cause  for  breach  of 
fellowship." 

Let  it  be  particularly  observed  that  all  these 
Universalists  claim  that  the  Scriptures  do  most 
clearly  teach  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation 
of  all  men;  and  yet  scarcely  two  of  them  agree 
on  fundamental  doctrines.  With  them  it  would 
seem  to  be  of  little  consequence  whether  a  man 
believes  that  the  soul  is  mortal  or  immortal; 
whether  men  will  be  punished  after  death  or 
not ;  whether  Jesus  was  divine  or  human ; 
whether  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement  is 
true  or  false.  They  seem  only  to  agree  upon 
one  thing,  which  is,  that  some  time,  in  some 
way,  and  by  some  means,  all  men  will  be  made 
holy  and  happy. 

^ow,  if  we  know  anything  that  remains 
for  man   after  this  life,  the   Bible  must   reveal 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  19 

it ;  for  in  no  other  way  can  we  know  anything 
about  the  hereafter.  If  the  pure  in  heart  shall 
see  God,  the  Bible  must  say  so.  If  the  life  to 
come  is  in  any  way  affected  by  the  acts  of  this 
life,  the  Scriptures  must  inform  us.  If  those 
who  live  and  die  in  sin  are  to  be  made  holy  in 
death,  or  in  the  resurrection^  or  between  the 
death  and  resurrection  of  the  body,  or  some 
time  after  the  resurrection,  the  word  of  God 
must  so  teach  us.  The  Scriptures  do  say  that 
"the  pure  in  heart  shall  see  God;"  that  "whoso- 
ever believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved;" 
and,  "he  that  shall  endure  to  the  end,  the  same 
shall  be  saved."  All  this  is  very  plain*  ]^o 
man  who  believes  the  Bible  at  all  has  any  dif- 
ficulty in  understanding  and  believing  these 
plain  declarations.  But  observe  that  the  Bible, 
in  language  just  as  plain  and  explicit,  says, 
"He  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned/'  "He 
that  soweth  to  his  flesh,  shall  of  the  flesh  reap 
corruption."  "Whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  that 
shall  he  also  reap."  "  The  unbelieving,  the 
murderer,  the  idolater,  the  liar,  shall  have  their 
part  in  the  lake  which  burneth  with  fire  and 
brimstone,  which  is  the  second  death."  But  we 
are  told — notwithstanding  these  plain  declara- 
tions— that  all  men,  the  wicked,  the  unbeliever, 
the  murderer,  the  liar,  will  some  time  be  made 


20  UNIVERSAL    MSTOUATION 

holy  and  happy.  It  may  he  in  death,  or  it  may 
be  in  the  resurrection^  ot  it  may  not  he  for 
milliong  of  years  aftei*  the  resurrection  of  the 
bodyi  Who  that  believes  in  the  future  exist- 
ence of  man  can  risk  his  eternal  all  on  such 
uncertainties  ? 

Matthew  Hale  Smith,  who  for  many  years 
preached  the  doctrine  of  Universalism,  after  re- 
nouncing it  wrote  a  book  entitled,  "Universal- 
ism not  of  God.*'  On  pages  ninety-four  and 
ninety-five  he  says,  "Universalism  has  no  fixed 
character.  It  is  not  the  same  in  any  two  periods 
of  time.  It  is  a  child  of  many  parents.  At  one 
time  it  teaches  that  men  are  to  be  saved  from 
hell)  and  at  another  that  men  were  never  ex- 
posed to  hell.  It  teaches  at  one  time  that 
Christ,  by  his  death,  made  a  vicarious  atone- 
ment ;  at  another,  that  his  death  was  simply 
that  of  a  witness  to  the  truth.  We  are  told  by 
one  father  that  men  will  be  saved,  because  Christ 
has  ransomed  them,  or  paid  their  debt;  by 
another,  that  men  are  adequately  punished,  and 
are  saved  on  the  ground  of  strict  retributive 
justice;  and  by  still  another,  that  the  resurrec- 
tion is  to  do  the  work  and  prepare  men  for 
heaven.  At  one  time  men  are  thought  to  be 
justly  exposed  to  endless  punishment;  at  an- 
other, endless  punishment  is  regarded  cruel  and 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  21 

unjust.  With  some,  Christ  was  divine;  with 
others,  he  was  simply  a  man.  The  explanations 
of  scripture  adopted  by  the  sect  are  equally  con- 
tradictory. Two  or  three  different  and  contra- 
dictory interpretations  attend  the  same  text. 
When  one  of  the  explanations  does  not  remove 
a  scriptural  difficulty  out  of  the  way  of  Uni- 
versalism,  another  is  adopted,  and  then  another. 
Thus  the  twenty-fifth  chapter  of  Matthew  is,  by 
Mr.  Murray,  referred  to  the  judgment.  Accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Ballon,  it  shows  that  sinners  are  to 
be  cast  into  the  love  of  God.  And  Mr.  Balfour 
is  very  certain  that  it  refers  to  the  valley  of 
Ilinnom." 

There  has  never  been  a  Christian  since  the 
days  of  Jesus  Christ  who  did  not  believe  that 
all  who  believingly  obey  the  gospel  will  be 
saved.  Upon  this  they  all  are  agreed;  there  is 
not  a  dissenting  voice.  All  Christians,  in  all 
time  past,  have  taught  that  men  ought  to  obey 
the  gospel  of  Christ.  Universalists  very  gener- 
ally teach  this.  But  they  teach  more  than  this. 
They  teach  that  all  men — whether  they  obey 
the  gospel  or  not— shall  ultimately  be  holy 
and  happy.  The  infidel  or  skeptic  is  as  sure 
of  heaven  as  the  most  devout  Christian.  But 
does  this  appear  in  the  teachings  of  the  Bible? 
If  it  wer^  true  that  all  men  are  to  be  made  holy 


22  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

and  happy,  it  would  certainly  be  written  some- 
where in  language  so  plain  that  all  would  see 
it.  But  in  turning  to  the  sacred  Scriptures  we 
read  that  "  the  wicked  shall  be  turned  into 
hell,  and  all  the  nations  that  forget  God;" 
"  the  smoke  of  their  torment  shall  ascend  for- 
ever and  ever;"  "these  shall  go  away  into 
everlasting  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into 
life  eternal."  Now,  if  Christ  and  the  apostles 
were  all  Universalists,  is  it  not  most  remarkable 
that  they  should  have  used  language  that  would 
lead  the  great  mass  of  Bible  students  astray. 
"The  patriarchs  knew  it  not.  Inspired  men  of 
old  wrote  of  the  misery  of  the  damned.  The 
chosen  people  of  God,  instructed  by  his  inspired 
prophets,  have  ever  believed  that  eternal  death 
is  the  doom  of  the  wicked." 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  23 


CHAPTEE  II. 

HOLINESS. 

TJiiiversalists,  though  diflering  widely  from 
each  other  on  fundamental  principles,  neverthe- 
less believe  and  teach  that  all  men  will  ulti- 
ynately  be  made  holy  and  happy,  but  deny  that 
any  man  can  be  made  holy  in  this  life. 

Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  Theology  of  Universalism, 
page  229,  declares  that  no  man  is  perfect  here; 
that  all  will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  res- 
urrection. On  page  228  he  says,  ''The  saving 
power  of  Jesus  over  the  soul  is  not  limited  to 
this  world,  nor  is  it  surrendered  at  the  death 
of  the  body."  ''If  it  be  asked,"  he  says,  "how 
Christ  is  to  save  men  after  death,  the  answer 
is,  By  the  same  means  and  in  the  same  way  as 
before  death."  On  page  205  he  says,  "But 
it  may  be  said  that  all  men  are  not  saved  in 
this  life;  that  thousands  die  in  ignorance,  un- 
belief, and  sin.  This  is  true;  and  it  is  not  af- 
firmed by  our  argument  that  all  men,  or  any^ 
are  perfectly  saved  in  this  world."  Mr.  Rogers, 
in  his  Pro  and  Con  of  Universalism,  page  57, 


24  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

says,  "  XJniversalists  maintain  that  God's  love 
is  as  strong  beyond  as  on  this  side  of  the  grave ; 
and  what  it  fails  of  accomplishing  here,  it  will 
infallibly  accomplish  hereafter."  Here,  then,  we 
have  the  ''Theology  of  Universalism"  on  the 
doctrine  of  holiness,  or  Christian  perfection: 
(1.)  ISTo  man  can  be  perfect  in  this  life.  (2.) 
All  will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resur- 
rection. The  best  of  men  fail  in  many  things. 
(3.)  Christ  will  save  men  after  death  by  the 
same  means  and  in  the  same  way  as  before  death. 
Matter  and  mind  are  things  altogether  dis- 
tinct and  opposite  in  their  nature.  This  be- 
ing the  case,  it  will  be  necessary  for  us  to  de- 
termine something  of  the  nature  of  sin.  Is  sin 
predicable  of  matter  or  mind?  We  answer  that 
it  must  be  predicable  of  mind,  and  not  of  mat- 
ter. Matter  is  not  capable  of  hating  God 
nor  loving  him ;  therefore,  "  sin  and  holi- 
ness are  predicable  only  of  the  affections  of  the 
mind,  and  not  of  matter."  "With  these  fjicts 
before  us,  we  must  adopt  one  of  four  concbi- 
sions.  First:  The  soul  immediately  after  death, 
or  in  death,  is  made  holy;  or,  second,  it  enters 
the  future  world  unholy,  and  conse»queutly  mis- 
erable ;  or,  third,  the  soul  is  made  holy  in  the 
resurrection;  or,  fourth,  it  dies  with  the  body. 
There  can  be  no  fifth  supposition.     "We  propose 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  25 

now   to  examine  these  four  suppositions  accord- 
ing to  the  teachings  of  Universalist  authors. 

First.  "  The  soul  immediately  after  death,  or 
in  death,  is  made  holy."  This  can  not  be  true, 
for  the  following  reasons:  (1.)  Mr.  Thayer 
says,  page  229,  "  The  spiritual  change  of  the 
resurrection  is  necessary  to  the  completeness  and 
happiness  of  every  soul."  Again  he  says:  "All 
men  are  saved,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  after 
death."  The  meaning  is,  that  no  man  is  or  can 
be  made  holy  until  the  resurrection.  This  same 
doctrine  is  taught  by  Mr.  Pingree  and  Mr.  Bal- 
lon. J^ow,  if  all  men  were  made  holy  in  death, 
or  immediately  after  death,  they  would  need 
no  such  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection. 
Hence,  according  to  Universalism,  the  soul  is 
not  and  can  not  be  holy  in,  nor  immediately 
after  death.  (2.)  Universalists  teach  that  all 
men  must  be  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law.  Those  who  do  not  receive  that  punish- 
ment in  this  life  must  receive  it  after  death. 
Mr.  Thayer,  page  317,  says,  "No  repentance 
can  save  from  the  just  penalty  of  the  violated 
law."  On  page  229  he  says:  "Christ  saves 
men  after  death  by  the  same  means  and  in  the 
same  way  as  before  death."  But  how  docs 
Christ  save  men  here?  On  page  316  Mr. 
Thayer    says,    "The   sin    is    punished   and   for- 


26  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

given;  the  penalty  of  transgression  is  inHicted, 
and  then  the  sinner  is  forgiven."  For  these 
reasons,  then,  it  is  impossible  for  the  soul  to  be 
made  holy  in  or  immediately  after  death.  The 
soul  must  be  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law  before  it  can  be  forgiven. 

Second.  The  soul  enters  the  future  world 
unholy,  and  consequently  miserable.  Mr.  Thay- 
er, page  205,  says  that  "it  is  true  that 
thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin," 
and  that  no  man  is  ^jerfectly  saved  in  this  loorld. 
But  how  will  we  harmonize  this  with  "  The- 
ology of  Universalism  ? "  Mr.  Thayer,  page 
302-303,  declares  that  "  the  present  is  a  state 
of  retribution,  and  not  of  probation ; "  that 
the  penalty  due  to  sin  is  inflicted  here.  "  The 
thing  done,"  he  says,  "is  our  reward  or  our 
punishment,  our  heaven  or  hell."  He  further 
teaches  that  no  man  is  rewarded  or  punished  in 
the  future  world  for  anything  he  may  do  here. 
"  The  present  is  a  state  of  retribution,  and  7iot 
of  j^rohation.''''  How  is  it,  then,  as  Mr.  Thayer 
admits,  that  thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbe- 
lief, and  sin?"  If  every  man  finds  his  heaven 
or  hell  in  what  he  does,  and  if  this  is  a  life  of 
retribution,  and  not  of  probation,  then  every  man 
must  be  fully  rewarded  or  punished  in  this 
world;   and  it  can  not  be  true  that  "thousands 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  27 

die  ill  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin."  What  ! 
men  fully  rewarded  or  punislied  in  this  world 
for  all  they  do,  and  yet  dia  in  ignorance,  unbe- 
lief, and  sin  ?  How  can  that  be  ?  But  to  show 
still  further  that  Universalism  is  a  system  of 
self-contradictions,  we  will  consider  this  in  con- 
nection with  another  idea.  Let  me  state  the 
points  clearly  and  fairly.  ''This  is  a  life  of 
retribution,  and  not  of  probation."  Men  find 
their  heaven  or  hell  in  what  they  do.  ''  The 
thing  done  is  its  own  reward;  there  is  no 
other — there  can  be  no  other."  But  notwith- 
standing, "  thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief, 
and  sin."  What  is  the  nature  of  that  sin  in 
which  men  die,  if  all  men  are  fully  rewarded  or 
punished  in  this  life  for  all  they  do  ? 

Third.  The  soul  is  made  holy  in  the  res- 
urrection. This  can  not  be.  (1.)  Because 
Mr.  Thayer  says,  ''  Christ  saves  men  after 
death,  the  same  as  before  death."  How  does 
Christ  save  men  before  death?  '' They  are  pun- 
ished, and  then  forgiven."  Will  men  be  pun- 
ished in  or  by  the  resurrection?  If  men  are 
fully  rewarded  or  punished  in  this  life,  what  are 
tliey  punished  for  after  death?  (2.)  Some  men 
died  five  thousand  years  ago;  some  will  die  but 
one  year  before  the  resurrection;  but  all  these 
will  have  to  remain  unholy  till  the  resurrection, 


28  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

for  Mr.  Thayer  .says,  ''  Every  soul  will  need  a 
spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection;"  none  are 
perfect  here.  Hence,  Koah  must  wait  until  the 
resurrection,  when  he,  with  his  brethren  who 
died  outside  of  the  ark,  will  be  made  holy  to- 
gether. Paul  desired  to  depart  and  be  with 
Christ,  which  he  said  was  far  better.  He  further 
stated  that  to  be  ''absent  from  the  body"  was 
to  be  ''present  with  the  Lord.''  Present  with  the 
Lord,  where  ?  ]N'ot  in  heaven,  surely.  He  was 
mistaken,  if  Universalism  is  true.  He  might  be 
absent  from  the  body,  but  could  not  be  present 
with  the  Lord.  He  must  wait  until  the  resurrec- 
tion. 

Fourth.  "  The  soul  dies  with  the  body."  This 
can  not  be  true  for  the  following  reasons :  (1.) 
Universalists  teach  that  the  saving  power  of  Jesus 
over  the  soul  is  not  limited  to  this  world;  that 
Christ  saves  men  after  death  by  the  same  means 
and  in  the  same  way  as  before  death,  which  he 
could  not  do  if  the  soul  dies  with  the  body.  (2.) 
If  the  soul  dies  with  the  body,  then  punishment 
must  cease.  How  then  will  those  be  punished 
who  die  in  sin?  What  then  is  the  condition  of 
the  soul  between  the  death  and  resurrection  of 
the  body  ?  Is  it  dead  or  alive;  happy  or  miser- 
able ?     Is  it  in  heaven  or  in  hell  ? 

If,  as   Universalists   affirm,  Christ   saves  men 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  29 

after  death  by  the  same  means  and  in  the  same 
way  as  before  death,  then  they  must  have  the 
Bible,  the  influence  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  preach- 
ing of  the  gospel;  for  all  these  are  in  some  way 
connected  with  the  salvation  of  men  here.  But 
how  does  Christ  save  men  here?  Mr.  Thayer 
says,  ''  Christ  does  not  save  men  from  any  pun- 
ishment due  to  sin."  On  page  317  he  declares 
that  "no  repentance  can  save  from  the  just  pen- 
alty of  the  violated  law."  Then  those  who  die 
in  sin  must  be  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law.  But  no  man  can  be  punished  in  the  world 
to  come  for  what  he  does  here ;  for  this  is  a  life 
of  retribution,  and  not  of  probation.  "  The  thing 
done  is  its  own  reward;  there  is  no  other." 

Respecting  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrec- 
tion, I  submit  the  following  thoughts:  There  is 
nothing  in  the  word  that  indicates  a  change  of 
anything  more  than  the  body.  It  comes  from 
the  latin  re,  again,  and  surgere,  to  rise, — simply 
to  rise  again.  Hence,  nothing  will  be  raised  up 
but  the  body,  and  nothing  w^ill  be  changed  but 
that  which  is  raised  up.  Paul  speaks  of  the 
raising  up  of  the  body,  and  of  changing  the  vile 
body;  of  putting  off  the  corruptible  and  putting 
on  the  incorruptible ;  but  it  is  nowhere  said  that 
the  moral  character  of  the  soul  will  be  changed 
in  or  by  the  resurrection  of  the  body.     There  is 


30  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

but  one  possible  ground  upon  which  to  claim  a 
spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection,  and  that  is, 
that  the  soul  dies  with  the  body.  But  this  they 
dare  not  say,  for  Mr.  Thayer  says  that  'Hhe 
saving  power  of  Jesus  over  the  soul  is  not  lim- 
ited to  this  world,  nor  is  it  surrendered  at  the 
death  of  the  body."  Again  he  says  that  "Christ 
saves  men  after  death  by  the  same  means  and  in 
the  same  way  as  before  death."  Then,  by  some 
means,  those  who  die  in  "ignorance,  unbelief, 
and  sin,"  must  be  made  holy  between  the  death 
and  resurrection  of  the  body.  But  this  can  not 
be,  for  Universalists  teach  that  all  men  will  be 
made  holy  in  the  resurrection.  And  this  can  not 
be,  for  they  teach  that  "  Christ  saves  men  after 
death  by  the  same  means  and  in  the  same  way 
as  before  death."  * 

'•'•  To  show  still  further  that  Universal  ism  is  utterly  at  variance  with 
reason  and  revelation,  and,  indeed,  with  itself,  I  will  give  two  or  three 
extracts  from  Mr.  Thayer's  works.  On  page  210  he  says:  "The  resur- 
rection is  a  moral  and  spiritual  change— the  anantasis,  or  raising  up  of 
the  soul.'^  On  page  219  he  says  :  "Now  the  Savior  says  that  the  resurrec- 
tion works  such  an  entire  changein  man,  so  purifies  and  exalts  his  soul, 
lifts  him  so  entirely  out  of  the  earthly  into  the  heavenly  that  he  becomes, 
by  this  very  anastasis  (resurrection),  or  transformation,  a  child  of  God. 
()/'  cmu-ie  this  establishes  the  fact  that  the  resurrection  has  to  do  with  more 
than  the  body."  The  fact  stated  by  this  author  is  that  the  resurrection 
is  a  moral  and  spiritual  change  ;  that  it  has  to  do  rcith  more  than  the  body  ; 
it  is  a  raisiiiff  up  of  the  sotd.  Now  if  this  be  true,  the  soul  must  die  Avith 
the  body.  If  this  is  not  what  he  means,  what  are  we  to  understand  by 
th  J  raising  up  of  the  soul  ?  And  what  does  he  mean  when  he  declares 
that  the  resurrection  has  to  do  with  more  than  the  body?  'But  if  he  does 
not  mean  that  the  soul  dies  with  the  body,  then  where  is  it?  and  what 
is  its  condition  ? 

Mr.  (xuild,  author  of  'The  Universalist's  Book  of  Reference,"  page 
334,  says  :  "The  change  to  be  effected  by  the  resurrection  is  something 
more  than  a  mere  physical  change.''  But  what  more  can  it  be?  In  the 
same  connection  he  says:  "As  in  the  earthly  man  (Adam)  all  die  phys- 
ically and  morally,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive  physically 
and  morally."    But  when  are  all  to  be  made  alive  physically  and  mor- 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  31 

But  let  US  turn  away  from  these  self-contradic- 
tions to  the  plain  teachings  of  the  word  of  God. 
The  doctrine  we  are  seeking  to  confute  by  this 
argument  is  this :  no  man  is  or  can  be  perfect  in 
this  world.  The  best  of  men  necessarily  fail  in 
many  things.  All  will  need  a  spiritual  change 
in  the  resurrection.  This  monstrous  doctrine 
shuts  the  gates  of  heaven  against  all  the  Old  and 
I^ew  Testament  saints.  'No  matter  how  pious 
they  were,  they  are  outside  of  heaven,  and  must 
remain  there,  among  the  vile  and  vicious,  until 
after  the  resurrection.  The  worst  men  that  ever 
lived,  who  died  in  unbelief  and  sin,  will  enter  the 
kingdom  of  glory  all  the  same  and  just  as  soon  as 
the  most  pious  and  devout.  But  do  the  Script- 
ures warrant  us  in  the  belief  that  any  man  can  be 
made  holy  in  this  life?  Universalists  say  no;  but 
what  saith  the  word  of  God  ? 

''How  shall  we,  that  are  dead  to  sin,  live  any 
longer  therein  ? "  (Rom.  vi.  2.)  Paul  speaks  else- 
where of  those  that  are  dead  in  trespasses  and 
sin,  but  they  had  been  quickened,  made  alive,  and 
were  now  dead  to  sin.    Hence  the  question,  "How 

ally?  Mr.  Guild  says,  in  the  resurrection.  Then  all  men  will  remain 
physically  and  morally  dead  till  the  resurrection.  But  where  are  they 
and  what  is  their  condition  between  death  and  the  resurrection  ?  They 
can  not  be  in  heaven,  unless  we  admit  that  morally  dead  souls  are 
there.  They  can  not  be  in  hell,  for  Universalists  say  there  is  no  such 
place.  Where,  then,  are  they?  But  Mr.  Guild  says,  page  90  :  "Man- 
kind are  as  much  rewarded  and  punished  here  as  they  ever  will  be." 
How  is  it,  then,  that  men  will  remain  morally  dead  till  the  resurrec- 
tion ?  Is  not  moral  death  the  effect  of  sin  ?  Yes  ;  Mr.  Guild  says,  pagre 
334,  "that  moral  death  is  the  result  of  sin,  which  every  man  commits." 


32  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

shall  those  dead  to  sin  continue  to  live  in  it?  Can 
a  man  be  dead  and  alive  at  the  same  time?" 
"  The  phraseology  of  this  verse,"  says  Dr.  Clarke, 
"is  common  among  the  Hebrews,  Greeks,  and 
Latins.  To  die  to  a  thing  or  person,  is  to  have 
nothing  to  do  with  it  or  him ;  to  be  totally  sepa- 
rated from  them."  This  is  the  true  state  of  every 
real  Christian.  He  is  dead  to  sin, — separated 
from  it, — and  does  not  and  can  not  live  in  it,  as 
long  as  he  is  dead  to  it. 

"  Be  ye  therefore  perfect,  even  as  your  Father 
which  is  in  heaven  is  perfect."  (Matt.  v.  48.) 
"  That  ye  may  stand  perfect  and  complete  in  all 
the  will  of  God."  (Col.  iv.  12.)  "Ye  are  com- 
plete in  him."  (Col.  ii.  10.)  "  But  let  patience 
have  her  perfect  work,  that  ye  may  be  'perfect  and 
entire^  wanting  nothing."  (James  i.  5.)  These 
words  are  very  emphatic — jperfect,  complete,  entire, 
God  is  perfect  in  all  his  attributes,  so  we  are  to  be 
perfect  as  men.  Mr.  Thayer  says  that  no  man  is 
or  can  be  perfect  in  this  life — none  are  perfectly 
saved  in  this  v^orld.  If  men  can  not  be  made 
free  from  all  sin  while  here,  it  is  certainly  very 
strange  that  Christ  and  the  apostles  should  have 
employed  terms  which,  taken  in  their  connection, 
can  mean  nothing  less.  "  If  any  man  be  in  Christ, 
he  is  a  new  creature;  old  things  have  passed  away; 
behold,  all  things  are  become  new."     Can  a  man 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  33 

be  in  Christ,  "  complete  in  him,"  and  still  not  be 
saved  from  all  sin?    JSTever. 

'' Having  therefore  these  promises,  dearly  be- 
loved, let  us  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of 
the  flesh  and  spirit,  perfecting  holiness  in  the  fear, 
of  God."  (II.  Cor.  vii.  1.)  ''Cleanse  ourselves 
from  all  iilthiness  of  the  flesh."  What  can  this 
mean,  but  to  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  sins  that 
are  done  against  the  body,  such  as  fornication, 
drunkenness,  etc.?  But  this  is  not  all.  We  are 
to  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of  the 
spirit — all  impure  and  unholy  passions  and  de- 
sires. Nor  is  this  all.  After  having  cleansed 
ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of  the  flesh  and  spirit, 
we  are  to  perfect  holiness  in  the  fear  of  God.  We 
must  seek  for  and  obtain  all  the  fullness  of  God, 
for  which  the  apostle  elsewhere  prays.  !N^ow, 
when  a  man  shall  have  cleansed  himself  from  all 
filthiness  of  the  flesh  and  spirit,  and  has  perfected 
holiness  in  the  fear  of  God,  if  he  is  not  saved 
from  all  sin  he  never  will  be. 

"  But  as  he  which  hath  called  you  is  holy,  so  be 
ye  holy  in  all  manner  of  conversation ;  because  it 
is  Avritten,  Be  ye  holy;  for  I  am  holy."  (I.  Peter 
i.  15, 16.)  God  is  eternally  holy,  and  can  not  look 
upon  sin  with  any  favor.  He  calls  upon  and  com- 
mands us  to  imitate  him  in  this.  "I  am  holy," 
therefore,  ''be  ye  holy."  "The  pure  in  heart  shall 
3 


34  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

see  God."  All  therefore  that  would  see — possess — 
God  must  be  holy — holy  in  heart  and  life. 

"And  the  very  God  of  peace  sanctify  you  whol- 
ly; and  I  pray  God  your  whole  spirit  and  soul  and 
body  be  preserved  blameless  unto  the  coming  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  (I.  Thes.  v.  23.)  The 
word  wholly  can  mean  nothing  less  than  entire, 
to  all  intents  and  purposes,  that  "  as  sin  hath 
reigned  unto  death,  even  so  may  grace  reign 
through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life  by  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord."  "  Sanctify  you  wholly, ^^  your 
whole  spirit,  soul,  and  body,  comprehending  every- 
thing that  constitutes  man  and  manhood.  All 
this  is  to  be  sanctified  and  preserved  blameless  to 
the  end.  IlTow,  when  a  Christian  is  thus  sanctified 
wholly,  and  when  his  whole  spirit,  soul,  and  body 
are  preserved  blameless  unto  the  end,  what  spiritual 
change  will  he  need  in  the  resurrection  other  than 
the  change  of  the  body  from  a  natural  to  a  spiritual 
body?  Add  to  this  the  language  of  Paul  in  Heb. 
xii.  14 :  "  Follow  peace  with  all  men,  and  holiness, 
without  which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord."  Here 
we  are  commanded  to  follow  peace  and  holiness, 
live  a  life  of  continued  sanctification,  for  without 
holiness  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord. 

If  it  were  necessary,  we  coald  give  scores  of 
passages  in  addition  to  those  already  given,  teach- 
ing not  only  the  necessity  of  holiness,  but  also 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  85 

that  that  state  is  to  be  attained  in  this  life*  Of 
the  many  passages  that  bear  on  this  subject,  not 
one  can  be  found  that  teaches  that  any  man  who 
dies  in  unbelief  and  sin  will  ever  be  made  holy. 
Universalists  affirm  that  all  men  will  ultimately 
be  made  holy.  At  the  same  time  they  admit  that 
thousands  die  in  unbelief  and  sin,  and  yet  they 
can  not  adduce  a  single  passage  that  teaches  that 
any  man  will  be  made  holy  after  death. 

We  are  sometimes  referred  to  I.  John  i.  8 :  "  If 
we  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves^ 
and  the  truth  is  not  in  us."  This  is  the  same  in 
signification  with  verse  10.  "  If  we  say  that  we 
have  not  sinned  we  make  him  a  liar."  For  "  all 
have  sinned."  "  All  have  gone  out  of  the  way." 
The  scope  of  the  apostle's  reasoning  is  simply 
this:  If  we  say  that  we  have  not  sinned,  we 
virtually  say  we  need  no  Savior.  If  we  have  no 
guilt,  no  sinfulness,  we  need  no  pardon,  and  hence 
no  cleansing.  But  this  is  not  the  fact.  "  All 
have  sinned,  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God." 
But  is  there  no  remedy?  Is  there  no  way  to  be 
reconciled  to  God?  Must  all  live  and  die  in  this 
sad  condition?  ITo,  there  is  a  remedy.  "If  we 
confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive 
us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  unright- 
eousness." John  proceeds  on  the  ground  that 
sin  exists  in  the  soul  after  two  modes  or  forms : 


86  UNIVERSAL    UESTOHATION 

1.  In  guilt,  which  requires  forgiveness  or  pardon; 

2.  In  'pollution,  which  requires  cleansing.     If,  from    • 
a  deep  sense  of  our  guilt  and  pollution^  we  humbly 
confess  our  sins  to  God,  he  w^ill  not  only  pardon 
the  guilt  of  sin,  but  cleanse  the  soul  of  its  pollution. 

In  this  argument  We  have  considered  the  follow- 
ing points : 

1.  According  to  tTniversalist  authors  no  man 
can  be  holy  in  this  life.  2.  All  men,  however 
pious  they  may  be,  will  need  a  spiritual  change  in 
the  resurrection.  3.  That  Christ  will  save  men 
after  death  in  the  same  way  and  in  the  use  of  the 
same  means  as  before  death.  In  answer  to  these 
propositions  we  have  shown : 

I.  That  sin  is  predicable  of  mind,  and  not  of 
matter.  Hence  the  mere  dissolution  of  the  body 
in  death  can  not  change  the  moral  character  of 
the  soul. 

II.  That  there  were  only  four  possible  suppo- 
sitions. (1.)  The  soul  immediately  after  death  is 
made  holy;  or  (2.)  It  enters  the  future  world  un- 
holy and  miserable;  or  (3.)  All  will  be  made 
holy  in  the  resurrection ;  or  (4.)  The  soul  dies 
with  the  body.  Neither  one  of  these  supposi- 
tions, according  to  Universalist  authors,  can  be 
true.     This  we  have  abundantly  shown. 

III.  That  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection 
is  contrary  to  the  nature  of  the  resurrection,  and 


CAKEFULLY   EXAMINED.  37 

not  implied  in  the  word.  Only  that  will  be  raised 
up  and  changed  which  dies. 

IV.  That  there  is  not  a  single  passage  of  script- 
ure that  teaches  that  any  who  die  in  unbelief 
and  sin  will  be  made  holy  in  death,  or  after  the 
death  of  the  body. 

Y.  That  the  Scriptures  do  teach,  in  plain  and 
unequivocal  language,  that  holiness  is  attainable 
in  this  life. 

In  closing  this  chapter  we  invite  special  atten- 
tion to  the  following  points : 

I.  What  becomes  of  the  soul  between  the  death 
and  resurrection  of  the  body?  Does  it  go  im- 
mediately to  heaven  ?  This  can  not  be  true  unless 
it  is  made  holy  in  or  immediately  after  death. 
And  this  can  not  be  true,  for  Universalists  teach 
that  all  will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resur- 
rection. Where,  then,  is  the  soul,  and  what  is  its 
condition  ? 

II.  If  this  life  is  a  state  of  retribution  and  not 
of  probation,  as  Universalists  assert,  then  all  men 
are  fully  rewarded,  or  fully  punished  in  this  life. 
Wliat  then  remains  to  be  changed  in  the  resur- 
rection? Men  are  either  holy  or  unholy  when 
they  die.  But  they  can  not,  if  Universalism  be 
true,  be  unholy  when  they  die ;  if  they  are,  then 
men  are  not  fully  punished  and  rewarded  in  this 
life.    If  sin,  or  its  effects,  go  beyond  this  world, 


38  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

then  this  life  must  be  a  state  of  probation  and  not 
*'  of  retribution.  But  the  effects  of  sin  must  go  be- 
yond this  life,  for  Universalists  teach  that  Christ 
saves  after  death  the  same  as  before,  and  that  all 
will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection. 
The  "  Theology  of  Universalism,"  as  taught  by 
Mr.  Thayer  and  others,  is  a  system  of  self-con- 
tradictions from  the  beginning  to  the  end. 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  39 


CHAPTER  III. 

SALVATION. 

The  doctrine  of  salvation  by  faith  in  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  is,  perhaps,  the  most  important  doc- 
trine in  all  the  range  of  human  thought  and  in- 
quiry. Is  the  salvation  of  the  gospel  present  and 
future,  or  present  only?  From  what  are  men 
saved,  and  how  are  they  saved  ?  These  are  ques- 
tions of  vast  moment,  and  demand  careful  inves- 
tigation. That  there  may  be  no  misunderstand- 
ing and  no  misrepresentation,  I  will  state  clearly 
and  distinctly  the  views  of  Universalist  authors. 

Mr.  Ballou  in  his  lectures,  page  14,  says :  "  The 
common  doctrine,  which  teaches  us  that  Christ  Jesus 
came  into  this  world  to  save  us  in  another  world, 
is  contrary  to  all  the  representations  which  are  found 
in  the  Scriptures.''  On  page  13  he  says,  "  There 
is  no  intimation  of  saving  sinners  from  any  pun- 
ishment to  which  they  were  exposed,  nor  from  any 
condition  that  they  were  not  already  in."  Accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Ballou's  doctrine  there  was  no  salva- 
tion wrought  out  by  Christ  but  what  is  realized  in 
this  world.    Yet  they  talk  about  the  ultimate  sal- 


40     *  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

vation  of  all  men.  If,  as  Mr.  Ballou  affirms, 
Christ  did  not  come  into  this  world  to  save  men 
in  another  world,  how  will  they  be  saved  in  a 
future  world? 

Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  "  Theology  of  TJniversalism," 
page  191,  says  that  in  "  the  character  of  the  sal- 
vation Christ  was  sent  to  work  out  in  the  soul  of 
man,  there  is  no  allusion  to  deliverance  from  the 
wrath  of  an  angry  God,  or  the  penalties  of  the 
divine  law."  On  page  204  he  says,  "  Salvation  is 
moral  and  spiritual ;  it  is  not  exemption  from  the 
just  retribution  of  wrong,  but  redemption  from 
the  wrong  itself."  Here,  then,  we  have  set  forth 
the  character  of  universal  salvation:  (1.)  It  is 
not  a  salvation  that  extends  into  the  future  world. 
(2.)  It  is  not  deliverance  from  any  punishment 
due  to  sin.  (3.)  It  is  not  deliverance  from  any  ex- 
po sedness  to  punishment  hereafter.  From  what, 
then,  does  this  salvation  deliver  us?  l^ot  from 
death,  for  all  men  die.  ItTot  from  any  exposedness 
to  punishment  hereafter.  N'ot  from  any  punish- 
ment due  to  sin  in  this  world,  for,  according  to 
the  teachings  of  Universalist  authors,  all  men 
must  be  punished  for  their  sins — punished  to  the 
fallest  extent  of  the  law.  From  what,  then,  does 
this  salvation  deliver  us?  What  must  be  the 
character  of  that  salvation  which  delivers  from 
sin  and  the  bondage  of  sin,  and  yet  does  not  save 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  41 

from  the  punishment  due  to  sin?  The  salvation 
of  TJniversalism  does  not  deliver  men  from  any 
punishment  due  to  sin  in  this  world,  nor  from  any 
exposedness  to  punishment  in  the  future  world; 
therefore  it  must  be  a  salvation  from  nothing. 

But  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  salvation  ? 
Webster  defines  it  to  be,  "The  act  of  saving; 
preservation  from  destruction,  danger,  or  great 
calamity."  All  the  lexicons,  commentators,  and 
critics,  so  far  as  I  know,  agree  in  defining  the 
word  to  mean  deliverance  from  evils  to  which 
men  are  exposed;  and,  as  we  shall  see,  the  sacred 
writers  used  it  in  this  sense. 

Universalists  admit  that  thousands  "  die  in  un- 
belief and  sin  J'  They  are  not  even  saved  in  the 
sense  of  universal  salvation.  What,  then,  is  their 
condition  ?  When,  where,  and  by  whom  will  they 
be  saved  ?  Mr.  Ballon  says,  "  Christ  did  not  come 
into  this  world  to  save  us  in  another  world." 
Then  all  who  die  in  "  unbelief  and  sin"  can  never 
be  saved.  It  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  under- 
stand upon  what  grounds  Universalists  can  claim 
the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men. 
Admitting  as  Mr.  Thayer  does,  that  thousands 
die  in  unbelief  and  sin, — and  then  Mr.  Ballon 
comes  in  and  affirms  that  Christ  did  not  come 
into  this  world  to  save  men  in  another  loorld, — we 
are    driven    to    one    of   two   conclusions,   either 


42  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

that  those  who  die  in  sin  will  not  be  saved  at  all, 
or  if  saved,  it  will  be  through  some  other  savior 
than  the  one  offered  in  the  gospel.  There  is  not  a 
passage  in  the  Old  or  New  Testament  that  teaches 
that  any  man  will  come  to  Christ  for  salvation 
after  death. 

Mr.  Thayer,  in  discoursing  further  on  the  na- 
ture of  salvation,  page  191-2,  says,  "  The  salva- 
tion which  Jesus  sets  forth  in  his  prophetic  testi- 
timony,  as  the  work  on  which  he  was  sent  of  the 
Father,  is  spiritual  salvation,  the  enlightenment 
of  the  mind,  the  purification  of  the  heart,  and  the 
peace  and  comfort  of  a  perfect  faith  in  God." 
N^ot  a  word  about  deliverance  from  the  just  pen- 
alty of  the  violated  law,  Kot  a  word  about  de- 
liverance from  any  exposedness  to  punishment 
after  death.  But  thousands  die  who  have  not  ex- 
perienced this  spiritual  salvation;  they  know 
nothing  about  the  purification  of  the  heart  and 
the  comforts  of  a  perfect  faith  in  God.  They  die  in 
unbelief  and  sin.  "Where  are  they,  and  what  is  their 
condition?  '''No  repentance,"  says  Mr.  Thayer, 
''  can  save  them  from  the  penalty  of  the  violated 
law."  Query :  Are  men  first  punished  and  then 
saved,  or  are  they  first  saved  and  then  punished? 
If  they  are  first  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law,  from  what  are  they  then  saved?  Or  if  they 
are  first  saved,  for  what  then  are  they  punished  ? 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  43 

But  we  will  turn  to  the  word  of  God  and  learn 
if  possible  what  meaning  the  saered  writers  gave 
to  the  word  salvation.  They  must  have  known 
the  proper  sense  in  which  to  use  that  word. 
"  And  Moses  said  unto  the  people,  Fear  ye  not, 
stand  still,  and  see  the  salvation  of  the  Lord." 
(Exodus  xiv.  13.)  Here  it  is  clear  that  the  word  is 
used  in  the  sense  of  deliverance  from  danger. 
God  saved  them  from  their  enemies  and  the  perils 
of  the  sea.  ^'  Eight  souls  were  saved  by  water." 
(I.  Peter  iii.  20.)  Saved  from  the  deluge.  They 
were  not  first  drowned  and  then  saved,  nor  were 
they  first  saved  and  then  drowned.  They  were 
simply  saved — delivered  from  dauger. 

I  invite  special  attention  to  two  passages  of 
Scripture.  "  Much  more  then,  being  justified  by 
his  blood,  we  shall  be  saved  from  wrath  through 
him."  (Rom.  v.  9.)  "  And  to  wait  for  his  Son 
from  heaven,  whom  he  raised  from  the  dead, 
even  Jesus,  which  delivered  us  from  the  wrath  to 
come."  (I.  Thes.  i.  10.)  It  is  very  evident  that 
the  apostle  in  the  first  of  these  passages  refers  to 
the  judgment  of  God  against  sin.  ''Saved  from 
wrath,"  etc.  Delivered  from  the  punishment  due 
to  sin.  Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  "  Theology  of  Univers- 
alism,"  when  commenting  upon  this  passage,  felt 
its  force.  He  says,  page  89,  "  The  word  '  wrath  ' 
here  may  be  supposed  to  refer  to  the  judgment 


44  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

of  God  against  sin ;  but  even  if  it  do,  it  is  not  the 
judgment  or  punishment  of  sins  already  com- 
mitted that  is  meant."  This  is  the  merest  as- 
sumption. Reason  and  common  sense  are  against 
any  such  rendering.  "  Saved  from  wrath."  ITot 
saved  in  it,  nor  by  it,  but  from  it — from  the  judg- 
ment of  God  against  sin.  In  the  second  passage 
Paul  not  only  speaks  of  deliverance  from  wrath, 
but  from  the  "  wrath  to  come.''  Mr.  Thayer  says, 
page  189,  "It  is  singular  that  it  has  so  long  been 
taken  for  granted  that  salvation  is  deliverance 
from  punishment,  from  the  penalty  of  the  divine 
law,  from  hell  in  the  sense  of  endlesss  torment, 
from  the  consequences  of  sin,  instead  of  from  sin 
itself."  It  is  and  has  been  taken  in  that  sense  by 
the  Christian  church.  (1.)  Because  the  word 
itself  as  defined  by  lexicons,  commentators,  and 
critics,  means  nothing  less  than  deliverance  from 
evils  to  which  men  are  exposed.  Where  there  is 
no  danger  there  can  be  no  salvation.  (2.)  The 
sacred  writers  used  the  terms  saved  and  salvation 
in  the  sense  of  deliverance  from  danger.  "  Saved 
from  wrath.''  (3.)  Christian  teachers  have  al- 
ways failed  to  see  how  any  man  could  be  saved 
from  sin  itself,  and  yet  not  delivered  from  any 
punishment  due  to  sin.  That  would  simply  be  no 
salvation  at  all.  Mr.  Thayer,  page  191,  says, 
"  There  is  no  deliverance  from  the  wrath  of  God 


CAEEPULLY  EXAMINED.  45 

or  the  penalties  of  the  divine  law."  But  Paul 
says  there  is.  Mr.  Thayer  squarely  contradicts 
the  apostle.  iTniversalists  teach  that  Christ  saves 
from  sinfulness,  ignorance,  &c.  But  the  Script- 
ures say  he  sades  from  shu  He  not  only  saves 
from  a  sinful  nature,  but  from  the  consequences 
of  sin.  ''  We  are  saved  from  lorath  through  him.'' 
"  But  he  that  endureth  to  the  end  shall  be 
saved."  (Matt.  x.  22.)  "  But  he  that  shall  endure 
unto  the  end,  the  same  shall  be  saved."  (Matt, 
xxiv.  13.)  Saved  from  what  ?  I^ot  from  death, 
for  all  men  die.  ITot  from  any  punishment  due 
to  sin,  for  ITniversalists  say  that  no  man  can  be 
saved  from  suffering  the  just  penalty  of  the  law. 
iSTot  from  endless  punishment,  for  ITniversalists 
teach  that  there  is  no  such  thing.  From  what, 
then,  will  those  be  saved  that  endure  to  the  end  ? 
The  simple  meaning  of  the  passage  is  this :  Those 
who  hold  fast  faith  and  a  good  conscience  to  the 
end  of  life  shall  be  saved — delivered  from  the  de- 
struction that  shall  fall  upon  the  wicked.  Paul, 
in  Heb.  v.  9,  says  that  Christ  is  the  ''  author  of 
eternal  salvation.'''  But  if  the  doctrine  of  endless 
punishment  is  not  true,  the  doctrine  of  "  eternal 
salvation"  can  not  be  true;  for  when  that  to 
which  men  are  exposed  ceases,  then  the  idea  of 
deliverance  from  it  must  cease  also.  Can  a  man 
be  eternally  saved  from  nothing? 


46  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

Suppose  that  Christ  had  not  come  into  the 
world  at  all,  what  would  have  been  the  result? 
Universalists  teach :  (1.)  Christ  did  not  come 
into  the  world  to  save  men  from  any  punishment 
due  to  sin.  Every  one  must  suffer  the  penalty  of 
the  violated  law.  (2.)  Christ  did  not  come  into 
this  world  to  save  us  in  another  world.  In  what 
way,  then,  is  the  race  of  man  benefited  by  the 
advent,  suffering,  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ?  If 
he  had  not  come  at  all  men  would  have  lived, 
sinned,  and  suffered  for  their  sins,  and  have  gone 
to  heaven  at  last.  If  not,  why  not  ?  This  is  pre- 
cisely what  Universalists  teach.  Mr.  Thayer  says 
that  man  was  created  with  a  liabilit}^  to  sin ;  that 
this  life  is  not  a  probation,  but  a  state  of  ret- 
ribution;  every  man  must  suffer  for  his  own 
sins,  and  all  will  go  to  heaven  at  last.  Could  it 
have  been  otherwise  if  Christ  had  not  come  at  all  ? 
I  repeat  what  I  said  before,  that  TJniversalism  is  a 
salvation  from  nothing;  or  in  other  words,  there 
is  no  salvation  in  it.  John  represents  the  saints 
in  heaven  as  singing  with  a  loud  voice,  ^'  Salvation 
to  our  God,  which  sitteth  upon  the  throne,  and  to 
the  Lamb."  That  is  a  strange  song  for  the  saints 
to  sing  if  the  doctrine  of  TJniversalism  is  true. 
Christ  is  a  mighty  Savior.  He  saves  to  the  utter- 
most all  that  will  come  unto  God  by  him.  He  saves 
from  sin,  its  guilt,  pollution,  and  consequences. 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  47 

Mr.  Guild,  author  of  the  "  Universalist's  Book 
of  Reference,"  page  288,  says,  "It  is  nowhere 
said  in  the  Bible  that  Jesus  Christ  came  to  this 
world  to  save  men  in  another."  On  page  289  he 
says,  "  The  Bible  nowhere  informs  us  that  salva- 
tion consists  in  being  saved  from  the  penalty  of 
God's  law,  nor  from  deserved  punishment,  nor 
from  a  place  of  endless  punishment."  On  the  same 
page  he  says,  Christ  "  nowhere  informs  us  that  he 
came  to  save  any  man  from  any  danger  to  which 
he  was  exposed  in  another  world."  Mark  these 
quotations  carefully.  What  is  the  nature  of  sal- 
vation as  defined  by  this  author.  Page  289  he 
says,  "The  salvation  of-  the  gospel  consists  in 
being  saved  from  darkness,  from  unbelief,  from 
sin  and  all  its  evil  consequences."  iTow,  let  me 
ask,  Is  not  the  punishment  for  sin  some  of  its 
"evil  consequences?"  Our  author  affirms  that 
salvation  does  not  "consist  in  being  saved  from 
the  penalty  of  God's  law,  nor  from  deserved  pun- 
ishment." And  on  the  very  same  page  he  says  it 
saves  "from  sin  and  all  its  attendant  evil  conse- 
quences." Can  any  man  put  these  affirmations 
together  and  make  sense  out  of  them? 

On  page  291  Mr.  Guild  says,  "  The  difterence 
between  the  believer  and  unbeliever  is  simply 
this:  the  believer  is  now  saved,  the  unbeliever  is 
to   be    saved."      Saved  from   what?      Why,   our 


48  •       UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

autlior  says,  as  already  quoted, that  "the  salvation 
of  the  gospel  consists  in  being  saved  from  dark- 
ness, unbelief,  and  from  sin  and  all  its  attendant 
evil  consequences."  But  when,  where,  and  how 
are  the  unbelievers  to  be  saved?  He  says  the 
believer  is  saved,  the  unbeliever  is  to  be  saved. 
Now,  I  want  to  put  two  or  three  things  together; 
no,  I  will  put  them  side  by  side,  for  an  angel 
could  not  put  them  together.  Mr.  Thayer,  on 
page  205,  admits  that  ^Hhousands  die  in  ignorance, 
■unbelief,  and  sin."  Mr.  Guild  says,  "The  unbe- 
liever is  to  be  saved."  And  on  page  288  he  says, 
"It  is  nowhere  said  in  the  Bible  that  Jesus  Christ 
came  to  this  world  to  save  mankind  in  another." 
]^ow,  I  want  to  know  when  those  unbelievers  who 
die  in  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin  are  to  be  saved  ? 
They  are  not  saved  here,  for  if  they  were  they 
would  not  die  \\i  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin;  and 
as  Jesus  Christ  did  not  come  into  this  world  to 
save  men  in  another,  we  can  reach  but  one  con- 
clusion, they  never  can  be  saved. 

In  this  argument  the  following  points  have  been 
considered : 

1.  Universalists  teach  that  salvation  is  no  de- 
liverance from  any  penalty  due  to  sin;  that  every 
man  must  suffer  for  his  own  sins  to  the  full  ex- 
tent of  the  divine  law.  "No  repentance,"  says 
Mr.  Thayer,  page  317,  "can  save  from   the  just 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  49 

penalty  of  the  violated  law."  And  on  page  274 
he  says,  "The  thing  done  is  our  reward,  or  our 
punishment,  our  heaven,  or  our  hell." 

2.  Universalists  teach  that  salvation  is  not  a 
deliverance  from  any  exposedness  to  punishment 
in  the  world  to  come.  Mr.  Ballou  says,  "Christ 
did  not  come  into  this  world  to  save  men  in  an- 
other world." 

To  show  the  unreasonableness  and  untruthful- 
ness of  these  assumptions  I  have  shown, 

1.  That  according  to  the  very  best  authority 
the  word  salvation  signifies  deliverance  from 
danger  and  great  calamity,  and  that  the  sacred 
writers  did  use  it  in  that  sense. 

2.  I  presented  a  number  of  passages  in  which 
the  word  salvation  occurs,  where  it  signifies  de- 
liverance from  the  punishment  due  to  sin.  "  Saved 
from  wrath,"  and  from  the  wrath  to  come. 

3.  That  a  salvation  from  sin  necessarily  in- 
cludes a  deliverance  from  the  punishment  due  to 
sin.  That  if  a  man  were  saved  from  sin  he  could 
not  be  punished  for  it;  or  if  he  were  punished  for 
it,  he  could  not  be  saved  from  it. 

I.  That  if  salvation  is  not  a  deliverance  from 
any  punishment  due  to  sin  in  this  world,  nor  from 
a]jy  exposedness  to  punishment  in  the  world  to 
come,  it  is  a  salvation  from  nothing;  and  hence 


50  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

the  race  of  man  is  in  no  way  benefited  by  the 
sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ. 

There  are  only  two  possible  suppositions.  First, 
men  are  saved  through  the  merits  of  their  own 
sufferings ;  or  second,  they  are  saved  through  the 
merits  of  Christ's  sufferings  and  death.  If.  we 
say  they  are  saved  through  or  by  the  merits  of 
their  own  sufferings,  then  the  sufferings  and  death 
of  Jesus  Christ  availed  nothing.  If  we  say  they 
are  saved  through  or  by  the  merits  of  Christ's 
suffering  and  death,  then  the  doctrine  of  Univers- 
alism,  which  teaches  that  all  men  must  be  pun- 
ished to  the  full  extent  of  the  divine  law,  must 
be  false. 

The  doctrine  of  Universalism  can  hardly  bo  ex- 
amined without  using  language  and  employing 
illustrations  that  will  sound  harsh  and  unkind. 
Yet  I  am  constrained  sometimes  to  call  things  by 
their  right  name.  Universalism,  as  set  forth  by 
their  own  teachers,  is  a  Christless  system.  They 
deny,  as  we  shall  show,  all  the  fundamental  doc- 
trines held  by  evangelical  churches.  It  is  infidel- 
ity in  its  most  dangerous  form. 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  51 


CHAPTER  IV. 

GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OP  SIN. 

# 

UiiiversaUsm  is  not  only  a  system  of  self-con- 
tradictions, but  of  glaring  absurdities.  In  this 
chapter  we  shall  show,  from  their  own  authors, 
that  they  make  God  the  author  or  cause  of  sin, 
and  hence  deny  also  the  free  agency  of  man. 

Mr.  Ballon  in  his  "  Treatise  on  the  Atonement," 
page  31,  says,  "Bntthe  ground  we  shall  take  is 
that  natural  evil  owes  its  origin  to  the  original 
constitution  of  our  animal  nature,  and  that  moral 
evil  or  sin  owes  its  origin  to  natural  evil."  Here 
we  have  sin  proceeding  from  natural  evil,  and 
natural  evil  owing  its  origin  to  the  original  con- 
stitution as  God  made  it.  If  this  does  not  make 
God  the  author  of  sin,  then  language  has  no  mean- 
ing. Again,  on  page  36-41  he  says,  "If  it  should 
b3  granted  that  sin  will  finally  terminate  for  good 
in  the  moral  system,  it  will  then  be  necessary  to 
admit  that  God  is  its  first  cause,  or  we  can  not 
say  that  God  is  the  author  of  all  good." 

I  win  now  give  three  extracts  from  the  "Pro 


52  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

and  Con  of  Universalism,"  by  George  Kogers,  to 
wiiich  I  invite  special  attention. 

On  page  81  he  says,  "  The  Scriptures  are  most 
satisfactory,  most  philosophical  upon  this  point 
(the  origin  of  sin) ;  they  teach  that  '  of  God  are 
all  things;'  they  represent  Jehovah  himself  as 
saying,  '1  form  the  light  and  create  darkness;  I 
make  peace  and  create  evil;  I  the  Lord  do  all  these 
things.' " 

On  page  286  he  says,  '"So  then,'  exclaims  the 
Arminian  objector,  'the  author  really  seems  bent 
on  proving  that  as  Jehovah  foreknew  the  exist- 
ence of  sin  he  must  also  have  designed  it.'  Yes, 
such  is  really  my  purpose." 

And  on  page  287  he  says^  "Having,  then,  as  I 
think,  established  the  conclusion  that  absolute 
foreknowledge  implies  foreordination,  I  proceed 
to  notice  the  objections  which  seem  to  lie  against 
it.  I  have  already  considered  the  most  formid- 
able of  these,  namely,  that  it  makes  God  the  au- 
thor of  sin.     And  I  now  ask  how,  on  any  ground, 

IS    THIS   TO    BE  AVOIDED?      I   ASSERT    MOREOVER   THAT 

IT  IS  PLAINLY  SCRIPTURAL."  Mr.  Rogcrs,  in  these 
passages,  clearly  and  plainly  teaches  that  God  is 
the  author  of  sin,  and  asserts  "that  it  is  plainly 
scriptural." 

Mr.  Thayer,  pages  19,  20,  says,  "It  is  plain, 
then,  that  God,  as  the  creator  of  mankind,  when 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  63 

he  determined  upon  the  nature  of  their  physical 
and  moral  condition  on  earth,  determined  that  it 
should  be  such  as  involved  the  liability  to  physical 
and  moral  evil,  and  consequently,  as  the  apostle 
says,  he  made  man  subject  to  vanity  (sin)  or  im- 
perfection." 

The  wayfaring  man,  though  a  fool,  can  not  fail 
to  see  how  plainly  the  teachings  of  XJniversalists 
contradict  the  word  of  God.  In  Gen.  i.  26,  27,  it 
is  declared  in  very  plain  language  that  God  made 
man  "in  his  own  image."  In  Eccl.  vii.  29,  Sol- 
omon says,  "  God  made  man  upright."  But  Uni- 
versalists  assert  that  man  was  created  with  a 
liability  to  sin;  that  he  was  made  imperfect;  that 
sin  was  produced  from  physical  causes,  proceeding 
from  the  original  constitution  of  man  as  it  came 
from  the  hands  of  God,  and  hence  God  is  the 
author  of  sin. 

Mr.  Thayer,  page  25-31,  argues  in  this  wise: 
"  If  there  had  been  no  sin  we  should  have  known 
nothing  of  Jesus  the  *  Christ.  If  there  were  no 
sin  we  should  lose  sight  of  half  the  glory  of  God, 
If  there  had  been  no  sin,  and  if  man  had  been 
perfect  in  the  beginning,  then  we  should  have 
knovrn  nothing  of  the  virtues  of  charity,  forgive- 
ness, faith,"  &c.  According  to  this  author  the 
most  glorious  thing  in  the  universe  is  sin.  One  is 
led  to  pity  the  angels  that  never  sinned.     Poor, 


54  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

ignorant  creatures,  they  do  not  know  half  as 
much  of  the  glory  of  God  as  we  do.  This  is  a 
monstrous  idea.  Sin,  that  blinds  the  eyes,  be- 
numbs all  the  finer  feelings  of  the  sOul,  insults 
God,  drives  man  into  every  hateful  vice,  curses 
and  blasphemes  the  very  name  of  God,  turns  out, 
according  to  Universalists,  to  be  a  most  glorious 
thing. 

The  "Pro  and  Con  of  Universalism "  not  only 
makes  God  the  author  of  sin,  but  encourages  men 
to  sin.  On  page  103  he  says,  ''  God  does  will  its 
(sin's)  existence,  for  the  present,  and  with  reference 
to  some  future  jyurpose  of  good,,  it  were  the  essence 
of  folly  to  deny,  for  otherwise  it  would  not  be." 
On  page  312  he  says,  "The  tiger  is  loose,  (by 
which  I  would  jDersonate  sin  and  misery,)  wheth- 
er by  appointment  or  permission  you  must  see 
that  the  divine  character  is  equally  concerned  in 
the  event.  Shall  it  roam  and  make  havoc  among 
God's  offspring  forever?  Or  shall  it  be  destroyed, 
the  wounds  it  has  inflicted  be  healed,  and  the  sub- 
jects of  its  violence  be  brought  to  see  by  experi- 
ence that,  all  things  considered,  it  was  better  for 
them  to  have  suffered  from  its  fury  for  a  time 
that  THEREBY  their  HAPPIJSTESS  might  be  EI^- 
HAjN^CED  FOR  ETEROTTY." 

God  is  the  author  of  sin,  and  it  were  better  for 
men  to  suffer  from  its  fury  for  a  time.     Why? 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  55 

Because  thereby  their  happiness  will  be  enhanced 
for  eternity.  What  a  monstrous  idea  !  "  Who, 
then,  would  not  desire  as  much  sin  as  possible, 
seeing  it  is  'for  our  hereafter  advantage,'  and  will 
result  in  greater  good  than  we  could  have  possibly 
experienced  without  its  means." 

If,  then,  as  these  Universalist  authors  teach,  man 
was  made  imperfect  and  possessed  of  such  nature 
as  invoked  the  liability  to  physical  and  moral 
evil  (this  Mr.  Thayer  affirms,  pages  19,  20) ;  and 
if  it  be  true,  as  Mr.  Ballon  affirms,  that  sin  pro- 
ceeds from  physical  causes  inherent  in  the  human 
constitution,  then  God  is  the  author  of  sin. 

It  will  be  proper  in  this  connection  to  introduce 
another  idea  which  stands  immediately  connected 
with  the  foregoing.  If  man  was  created  with  a 
liability  to  sin,  and  if  sin  proceeds  from  physical 
causes  inherent  in  the  constitution  as  it  c%me  from 
the  hands  of  God,  then  man  is  not  a  free  agent, 
on  which  account  he  can  not  be  held  responsible 
for  feelings  and  acts  which  necessarily  proceed 
from  his  physical  constitution.  Mr.  Rogers,  in  his 
"  Pro  and  Con  of  Universalism,"  page  300,  says, 
"  Believe  me,  reader,  it  is  not  possible  to  avoid 
the  conclusion  that  all  events  take  place  agreeably 
to  the  unalterable  decree  of  Jehovah."  Mr.  Bal- 
lon, in  his  "  Treatise  on  the  Atonement,"  page  38, 
says,  "  Man  is  de^^endent  in  all  his   volitions,  and 


56  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

moves  by  necessity."  On  page  36-41  lie  says, 
"  If  it  should  be  granted  that  sin  will  finally  ter- 
minate for  good  in  the  moral  system,  it  will  then 
be  necessary  to  admit  that  God  is  its  first  cause, 
or  we  can  not  say  that  God  is  the  author  of  all 
good!''  Mr.  Rogers,  page  255,  says,  ^' Sin  pro- 
ceeds wholly  and  altogether  from  our  animal  nature'' 
Universalists  having  embraced  the  erroneous  doc- 
trine which  makes  God  the  author  or  cause  of  sin, 
are  forced  to  deny  the  free  agency  of  man. 

John  defines  sin  to  be  the  transgression  of  law. 
!N"ow,  if  God  made  man  imperfect  and  gave  him 
such  a  constitution  as  involved  the  liability  to  sin, 
and  if  sin  proceeds  wholly  and  altogether  from 
our  animal  nature,  and  if  all  events  take  place 
agreeably  to  the  unalterable  decree  of  Jehovah, 
and  if  man  is  dependent  in  all  his  volitions  and 
moves  by  necessity,  then  who  is  responsible  for 
sin  ?  If  man  was  made  imperfect  and  moves  wholly 
by  necessity,  then  God  must  be  responsible  for  his 
acts.  It  would  be  unjust  and  cruel  to  hold  man 
responsible  and  punish  him,  either  here  or  here- 
after, for  feelings  and  actions  which  necessarily 
proceeded  from  his  physical  organization  as  God 
made  it. 

Let  us  look  at  this  erroneous  doctrine  in  the 
light  of  reason,  love,  and  justice.  (1.)  God  is 
the  author  or  cause  of  sin,  for  he  gave  man  such 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  57 

a  coustitutioii  as  involved  the  liability  to  sin,  and 
sin  proceeds  wholly  from  our  animal  nature.  (2.) 
Man  is  dependent  in  all  his  volitions  and  moves  by 
necessity,  and  hence  can  not  avoid  sin.  (3.)  Mr. 
Rogers,  in  his  "Pro  and  Con  of  Universalism," 
page  61,  says,  "It  is  a  thousand  times  declared  in 
his  (God's)  word,  in  one  form  or  another,  that  sin  is 
utterly  odious  to  him."  And  yet  God  is  the  author 
of  it,  and  made  man  so  that  he  could  not  avoid  sin, 
and  then  punishes  him  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
divine  law  for  every  sin  he  commits.  Thus  we  have 
a  system  which  teaches  that  God  is  the  author  of 
sin ;  that  he  hates  sin,  and  yet  made  man  so  he 
could  not  avoid  sin,  and  then  punishes  him  be- 
cause he  sins 

I  now  affirm  that  if  man  sins  from  any  physical, 
mental,  or  moral  necessity,  if  he  was  created 
imperfect,  with  a  liability  to  sin,  and  if  he  is  de- 
pendent in  all  his  volitions  and  moves  by  necessity, 
he  is  not  and  can  not  be  responsible  for  any  of  his 
acts,  and  it  would  be  the  most  glaring  injustice  to 
punish  him  for  anything  he  does.  As  well  might 
you  fling  up  a  stone  in  the  air  and  then  curse  it 
for  coming  down.  The  God  of  the  Bible  is  not 
the  God  of  Universalism.  Without  intending  to 
cast  any  reflection  on  the  intellignce  or  honesty 
of  the  Universalist  authors,  I  can  not  refrain  from 
expressing  my  utter  astonishment  that  any  class 


05  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

of  intelligent  men  should  have  fallen  into  such 
glaring  absurdities  as  to  mak6  God  the  author  of 
sin,  and  then  declare  that  he  punishes  man  for 
doing  what  he  could  not  avoid.  It  is  a  reflection 
upon  the  wisdom,  goodness,  and  justice  of  the 
Almighty. 

Kow,  let  us  examine  this  question  in  the  light  in 
God's  word.  God  made  man  perfect.  "  And  God 
said.  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image,  after  our  like- 
ness. So  God  created  man  in  his  own  image, 
in  the  image  of  God  created  he  him;  male  and 
female  created  he  them."  "And  God  saw 
evBvy  thing  that  he  had  made,  and,  behold, 
it  was  very  good."  Genesis  i.  26,  27,  31.  If 
we  turn  to  II.  Cor.  iii.  18,  we  may  learn  what 
that  image  was.  "But  we  all,  with  open  face  be- 
holding as  in  a  glass  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  are 
changed  into  the  same  image  from  glory  to  glory, 
even  as  by  tiie  Spirit  of  the  Lord."  So  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  iii.  10:  "And  have  put 
on  the  new  man,  wliicli  is  renewed  in  knowledge 
after  the  imar/c  of  him  that  created  hira."  "l^ow 
as  the  divine  nature  could  not  exist  in  forms  and 
fashions,  the  word  image  must  allude  to  knowledge, 
righteousness,  and  holiness;"  and  it  is  evident  that 
the  apostle  used  it  in  this  sense.  Solomon,  in 
Eccl.  vii.  29,  says,  "Lo,  this  only  have  I  found, 
that  God  hath  made  man  upright ;  but  they  have 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  59 

sought  out  many  inventions."  "Whatever  evil 
may  be  now  found  among  men  and  women  it  is 
not  of  God,  for  God  made  them  all  upright." 

God  created  man  a  moral  agent,  endowed  him 
with  the  power  of  volition,  and  holds  him  respon- 
sible for  his  acts.  "Whatsoever,  a  man  soweth 
that  shall  he  also  reap."  Man  being  a  free  agent 
did  of  his  own  free  will  violate  the  law  of  God, 
and  thereby  brought  sin  with  all  its  consequences 
into  the  world.  God  neither  created  sin  directly 
nor  indirectly  caused  it  to  be.  Man  alone  is  re- 
sponsible, and  his  future  destiny  depends  upon  his 
acts  in  time.  "  For  wo  must  all  appear  before  the 
judgment-seat  of  Christ;  that  every  one  may  re- 
ceive the  things  done  in  his  body,  according  to 
that  he  hath  done,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad." 
II.  Cor.  V.  10. 

If  God  is  the  author  or  cause  of  sin,  and  if  man 
is  not  a  free  agent,  then  I  invite  special  attention 
to  the  following  points:  (1.)  Why  is  God  angry 
with  the  wicked  every  day  ?  (2.)  Wliy  does  God 
hate  all  workers  of  iniquity?  (3.)  Why  does 
God  have  no  pleasure  in  wickedness?  (4.)  Why 
punish  man  here  or  hereafter  for  doing  what  he 
could  not  help  ?  (5.)  Why  bring  such  dreadful 
calamities  on  man  for  committing  sin  ? 

Because  God  overrules  evil  and  makes  even  the 
wrath  of  man  to  praise  him  does  not  prove  that 


60  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

he  is  the  author  of  sin.  The  brethren  of  Joseph 
were  none  the  less  guilty,  although  God  overruled 
it  for  good.  Those  that  crucified  the  Son  of  God 
were  just  as  guilty  as  though  no  good  had  come 
of  it.  Peter  charged  them  of  being  guilty  of  this 
heinous  crime.  We  are  sometimes  referred  to 
Isaiah  xlv.  7 :  ''I  form  the  light,  and  create  dark- 
ness: I  make  peace,  and  create  evil:  I  the  Lord 
do  all  these  things."  But  it  is  nowhere  said  that 
God  created  sin.  The  word  evil  does  not  always 
mean  sin.  It  is  written  that  God  repented  of  the 
evil  he  said  he  would  do  unto  the  ^N^inevites.  Are 
we  to  understand  that  God.  repented  of  the  sin  he 
was  about  to  commit  against  them  ? 

If,  as  these  Universal ist  authors  teach,  sin  was 
designed  for  a  good  end  and  will  enhance  our 
happiness  for  eternity,  then  the  more  we  have  of 
it  the  better.  But  how  is  sin  to  enhance  our  hap- 
piness for  eternity,  since  these  same  authors  bold- 
ly teach  that  this  life  is  not  a  probation,  but  a 
state  of  retribution;  that  every  man  has  his  heaven 
or  hell  in  what  he  does?  There  is  but  one  conclu- 
sion, which  is  this :  Sin  must  continue  to  exist 
through  all  eternity. 

In  closing  this  chapter  I  will  give  one  more  ex- 
tract from  a  Universalist  author,  Mr.  Guild,  page 
311:  ''Sin  in  man  has  its  origin  in  the  flesh  or  in  his 
animal  nature,  and  this  animal  nature  is  destined 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  61 

to  be  destroyed.  N^otliing  but  the  spiritual  nature 
of  man  can  survive  the  tomb."  If  sin  has  its 
origin  in  the  flesh  or  animal  nature,  then  it  can  be 
nothing  more  than  a  physical  evil.  But  on  page 
334  the  same  author  says,  "Moral  death  is  the 
result  of  sin,  which  every  man  commits."  How 
can  this  be,  if  sin  is  nothing  more  than  a  physical 
evil  ?     Will  some  one  please  explain  ? 


62  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  V. 

DEPRAVITY  AND  REGENERATION. 

Universalists  deny  the  doctrine  of  a  spiritual 
regeneration;  or  in  other  words,  they  deny  that 
regeneration  is  a  change  of  the  moral  constitution 
of  man,  and  hence  also  they  deny  the  doctrine  of 
hereditary  depravity. 

Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  ''  Theology  of  Universal- 
ism,"  page  151-2,  says,  "The  plain  doctrine  of 
the  Scriptures,  direct  and  inferential,  is  tluit  of  the 
entire  rectitude  of  human  nature.  Every  mortal 
brought  into  existence  is  placed  on  the  same 
moral  level  with  Adam  and  Eve,  equally  innocent 
and  pure.  .  .  .  The  man  of  to-day  is  created 
as  pure  as  the  first  man." 

I  am  utterly  at  a  loss  to  know  how  to  harmon- 
ize Universalism  with  itself.  In  the  preceding 
chapter  I  showed  from  Universalist  authors  that 
they  make  God  the  author  of  sin;  that  man  was 
created  imperfect;  that  sin  proceeded  from  his 
original  constitution  as  it  came  from  the  hands  of 
God.     l!Tow  in  this  quotation   from  Mr.  Thayer 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  63 

he  claims  'Hhe  entire  rectitude  of  human  nature;" 
that  Adam  and  Eve  loere  innocent  and  pure.  ''The 
man  of  to-day  is  created  as  pure  as  the  first  man." 
But  was  the  first  man  pure  ?  E'ot  if  Universalism 
be  true.  When  they  undertake  to  make  God 
the  autJior  of  sin  they  must  assume  that  man 
was  created  imperfect,  but  when  they  want  to 
disprove  tlie  doctrine  of  depravity  they  claim 
that  "  the  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures,  direct  and 
inferential,  is  that  of  the  entire  rectitude  of  hu- 
man NATURE."  Let  me  point  out  another  contra- 
diction. In  the  preceding  chapter  I  showed  that 
Mr.  Rogers  and  Mr.  Ballon  both  denied  the  free 
ageiu;y  of  man.  Mr.  liogcrs,  page  290,  says  "the 
notion  of  a  free  will  is  a  chimera,"  and  on  page 
300  lie  says  "that  it  is  not  possible  to  avoid  the 
conclusion  that  all  events  take  place  agreeably  to 
the  unalterable  decree  of  Jehovah."  Mr.  Ballon 
says,  "Man  is  dependent  in  all  his  volitions  and 
moves  by  necessity."  The  teachings  of  Univer- 
salism necessarily  must  lead  to  this  conclusion; 
and  yet  Mr.  Thayer  says,  page  153,  that  man  "is 
free  to  choose  good  or  evil ;  and  he  is  capable  of 
goodness,  virtue,  and  obedience,  by  nature,  of  his 
own  free  loiliy  But  how  is  he  free  to  act,  since 
God  has  fore-ordained  that  all  men  shall  be  saved? 
Men  must  go  to  heaven  whether  they  will  or  not. 
The  infidel  who  says  there  is  no  heaven,  the  athe- 


64  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

ist  who  says  there  is  no  God  nor  heaven,  must 
nevertheless  go  to  heaven,  because  God  has  deter- 
mined that  he  shall  go  there.  And  yet  Mr. 
Thayer  says  he  is  free  to  choose  good  or  evil. 
The  doctrine  of  Universalism  is  full  of  self- 
contradictions  from  the  beginning  to  the  end. 

But  notwithstanding  the  eitbrts  of  Universalist 
authors  to  disprove  the  doctrine  of  hereditary  de- 
pravity, and  a  spiritual  regeneration,  the  word  of 
God  most  plainly  and  positively  teaches  it.  Do  the 
Scriptures  teach  Avhat  Mr.  Thayer  affirms,  name- 
ly, "that  the  man  of  to-day  is  created  as  pure  as 
the  first  man?"  What  was  the  moral  state  of 
the  first  man?  Solomon  says,  "God  made  man 
upright."  In  Gei).  i.  26,  27  it  is  said,  ''God  creat- 
ed man  in  his  ouni  image^''  and  in  verse  31  it 
is  written  that  "  God  saw  everything  that  he  had 
made,  and  behold  it  was  very  good.''  Mr.  Thayer 
says,  "Every  mortal  brought  into  existence  is 
placed  on  the  same  moral  level  with  Adam  and 
Eve,  equally  innocent  and  pure."  Again  he  says, 
"  The  man  of  to-day  is  created  as  pure  as  the  first 
man."  Then  every  one  brought  into  existence 
has  the  image  of  God ;  they  are  not  only  good, 
but  very  good.  Do  the  Scriptures  warrant  us  in 
this  belief? 

If  the  entire  rectitude  of  human  nature  be  true, 
the  Bible  must  teach  it.    Come,  let  us  see.     "For 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  6^ 

all  have  sinned,  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of 
God."  (Rom.  iii.  23.)  "By  one  man  sin  enter- 
ed into  the  world,  and  death  by  sin ;  and  so  death 
passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  have  sinned." 
(Rom.  V.  12.)  "The  Scripture  hath  concluded 
all  under  sin,  that  the  promise  by  faith  of 
Jesus  Christ  might  be  given  to  them  that 
believe."  (Gal.  iii.  22.)  In  these  passages  we 
have  the  following  facts  set  forth:  1.  "All 
have  sinned,  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of 
God."  2.  "By  one  man  sin  entered  into,  the 
world,  and  death  by  sin."  3.  "The  Scriptures  con- 
clude all  under  sin."  IvTow  if  death  is  the  result 
of  sin, — and  Paul  affirms  that  it  is, — and  if  death  is 
universal, — which  is  also  affirmed, — then  sin  is  as 
universal  as  death.  ''Death  passed  upon  all?" 
Why  so  ?  Because,  Paul  says,  ''all'  have  sinned J^ 
All  have  not  committed  actual  transgression. 
The  simple  meaning  of  these  scripture  verses  is 
this  :  When  Adam  sinned  the  whole  race  of  man 
was  involved.  As  sure  as  death  passed  upon  all, 
all  were  included  in  the  fall.  "The  Scriptures 
conclude  all  under  sin." 

"Behold,  I  was  shapen  in  iniquity;  and  in  sin 
did  my  mother  conceive  me."  (Ps.  li.  5.)  What 
possible  sense  can  be  given  to  this  passage  on  the 
hypothesis  of  man's  natural  innocence  ?  But  in 
the  face  of  this  plain  declaration  of  God's  word, 


66  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

Mr.  Thayer  says  that  "  every  mortal  brought  into 
existence  is  placed  on  the  same  moral  level  with 
Adam  and  Eve,  equally  innocent  and  pure." 
The  man  of  to-day  is  created  as  pure  as  the  first 
man."  Was  the  first  man  "  shapen  in  iniquity 
and  conceived  in  sin?"  Mr.  Thayer  flatly  contra- 
dicts the  word  of  God.  Whom  shall  we  believe  ? 
"  To  will  is  present  with  me ;  but  how  to  per- 
form that  which  is  good  I  find  not.  For  the 
good  that  I  would,  I  do  not :  but  the  evil  which  I 
would  not,  that  I  do.  'Now  if  I  do  that  I  would 
not,  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwell- 
eth  in  me."  (Rom.  vii.  18-20.)  Here  the  apostle 
declares  that  he  could  will  that  which  was  good, 
but  how  to  perform  that  good  he  found  not.  I^ow 
if  every  man  that  comes  into  the  world  is  inno- 
cent and  pure,  and  if  the  doctrine  of  entire  recti- 
tude of  human  nature  be  true,  it  is  certainly  very 
strange  that  the  apostle  could  not  find  in  himself 
the  natural  and  moral  power  to  do  good.  But  he 
explains  why  he  could  not  do  that  which  was 
good.  ^'  It  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that 
divelleth  in  ?ne."  What  is  this  indwelling  sin  ?  It 
can  not  be  the  power  of  volition.  Paul  said  he 
could  will,  but  could  not  perform.  The  case 
stands  thus :  Paul  could  see  and  acknowledge 
the  good,  but  the  soul  was  so  completely  fallen 
that  it  had  not  the  moral  power  to  do  what  he 


CAREFULLY  EXAMtNfiD.  67 

saw  and  knew  to  be  right.  "It  is  no  more  I  tliat 
do  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me."  "  The  will  is 
right  but  the  passions  are  wrong."  "  My  will  is 
against  it;  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me  has  pos- 
sessed itself  of  all  my  carnal  appetites  and  pas- 
sions, and  domineers  over  my  soul."  Nothing 
but  the  grace  of  God  would  give  Paul  or  any 
other  man  power  to  do  good — to  obey  the  law  of 
God.  And  this  grace  is  given  to  all  who  ask  in 
faith. 

"  The  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God  t 
for  it  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God, 
neither  indeed  can  be."  (Rom.  viii.  7.)  There 
is  in  man  a  natural  and  strong  bias  to  do  evih 
The  carnal  mind,  which  can  mean  nothing 
else  than  the  soul  of  man  in  a  natural  state, 
is  enmity  against  God.  It  is  opposed  to  God 
and  everything  that  is  good.  It  is  enmity  in 
itself;  it  is  not,  and  can  not  be  subject  to  the 
law  of  God.  Whence  comes  this  enmity?  Is  it 
hereditary,  or  is  it  a  creature  of  education?  If 
it  is  a  creature  of  education,  why  do  all  men  go 
astray?  If  all  men  come  into  the  world  pure, 
and  if  the  doctrine  of  the  entire  rectitude  of  human 
liature  be  true,  is  it  not  singularly  strange  that 
all  should  take  the  same  course?  Would  it  not 
be  most  reasonable  to  expect  that  some  would 
love  and   obey   God  from   the   beginning?     But 


68  liNIVEHSAL    lll^BTolUTlON 

such  is  not  the  fact,  ''  they  have  all  gone  out  of 
the  way."  But  why  ?  Because  "  the  carnal  mind 
is  enmity  against  God :  for  it  is  not  suhject  to  the 
law  of  God,  neither  indeed  can  be." 

The  doctrine  of  hereditary  depravity,  or  the 
fall  of  Adam,  is  further  proved  by  such  passages 
of  scripture  as  clearly  describe  the  corrupt  and 
unrenewed  mind  and  heart  of  man.  "  The  heart 
is  deceitful  above  all  things,  and  desperately 
wicked."  (Jeremiah  xvii.  9.)  "Foolish  heart." 
(Exodus  [xxxv.  5.)  "A  proud  heart."  (Proverbs 
xxi.  4.)  "Impenitent  heart."  (Komans  ii.  5.) 
"  God  saw  that  the  wickedness  of  man  was  great 
in  the  earth,  and  that  every  imagination  of  the 
thoughts  of  his  heart  was  only  evil  continually." 
(Genesis  vi.  5.)  "And  were  by  nature  the  children 
of  wrath,  even  as  others."  (Ephesians  ii.  3.)  Here 
we  have  a  "deceitful,"  "foolish,"  "proud,"  and 
"  impenitent  heart."  It  is  not  strange  that  every 
imagination  of  the  thoughts  of  such  a  heart 
should  be  evil  continually. 

The  inherent  depravity  of  the  human  soul  is 
clearly  proved  by  those  scriptures  which  describe 
the  nature  and  urge  the  necessity  of  regeneration. 
"Except  a  man  be  born  again  he  can  not  see  the 
kingdom  of  God."  "  Ye  must  be  born  again." 
Mr.  Fletcher  makes  the  following  just  remarks  on 
this  point:     "In  every  religion  there  is  a  principal 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  ()9 

truth  or  error,  which,  like  the  first  link  of  a  chain, 
necessarily  draws  after  it  all  the  parts  with  which 
it  is  essentially  connected.  This  leading  principle 
in  Christianity,  distinguished  from  deism,  is  tlio 
doctrine  of  our  corrupt  and  lost  estate ;  for  if  man 
is  not  at  variance  with  his  Creator,  what  need  of 
a  mediator  between  God  and  him?  If  he  is  not 
a  depraved,  undone  creature,  what  necessity  of  so 
wonderful  a  restorer  and  Savior  as  the  Son  of 
God?  If  he  is  not  enslaved  to  sin,  why  is  he  re- 
deemed by  Jesus  Christ?  If  he  is  not  polluted, 
why  must  he  be  washed  in  the  blood  of  that  im- 
maculate Lamb  ?  If  his  soul  is  not  disordered, 
what  occasion  is  there  for  such  a  divine  physician  ? 
If  he  is  not  helpless  and  miserable,  why  is  he 
perpetually  invited  to  secure  the  assistance  and 
consolations  of  the  Holy  Spirit?  And  in  a  word, 
if  he  is  not  born  in  sin,  why  is  a  new  birth  so 
absolutely  necessary,  that  Christ  declares,  with 
the  most  solemn  asseverations,  without  it  no  man 
can  see  the  kingdom  of  God?" 

A  denial  of  the  doctrine  of  hereditary  depravity 
necessarily  includes  a  denial  of  the  doctrine  of  a 
spiritual  regeneration  or  a  change  in  the  moral 
nature  of  man.  Mr.  Thayer,  on  page  182-3  says, 
"Regeneration  does  not  imply  a  change  in  the 
moral  constitution  of  man,  but  a  change  of  opin- 
ion and  character  of  the  desires  and  aims  of  life; 


70  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

a  conversiou  from  unbelief  or  wrong  belief , and 
wickedness  to  faith  and  truth  and  holiness.  This 
change  is  not  wrought  in  a  moment  by  a  super- 
natural power,  but  is  the  result  of  a  proper  use 
of  divinely  appointed  means,  accompanied  by  the 
blessing  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  On  page  172  he 
says  that  the  doctrine  which  the  Savior  urged 
upon  JSTicodemus  "required  no  change  in  his 
moral  constitution,  nor  does  it  in  ours,  but  a 
change  of  opinion  and  action."  And  on  page 
174  he  says  that  regeneration  "is  the  work  of 
slow  and  steady  growth.  It  is  the  product  of 
months  and  years  of  watching  and  praying,  of 
struggling  and  effort,  of  battles  and  victories." 

Here  we  have  the  doctrine  of  regeneration  as 
taught  by  TJniversalist  authors,  l^o  change  of 
the  moral  nature,  or  constitution  of  man,  but  a 
change  of  opinion  and  character — a  mere  con* 
version  or  turning  around.  There  is  no  super- 
natural power  employed  in  this  work.  It  is  no 
sudden  change,  but  is  the  product  of  months  and 
years  of  watching  and  praying.  It  would  be  ex- 
ceedingly diihcult  to  form  any  conceptions  of  the 
nature  of  regeneration  as  taught  by  Universal] st 
authors. 

The  Scriptures  abound  with  illustrations  and 
positive  declarations  concerning  a  growth  in 
grace,  but  not  in  a  single  instance  is  there  a  word 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  71 

said  about  growing  into  regeneration.  The  very 
notion  of  such  a  thing  is  preposterous.  Dr.  Lee 
gives  in  substance  the  following  objections  to  the 
notion  of  a  gradual  regeneration.  (1.)  The  per- 
son going  through  this  work  of  months  and  years 
would,  during  its  progress,  be  neither  £t  for 
heaven  nor  hell ;  for  he  would "  be  neither  a  saint 
nor  a  sinner.  (2.)  There  would  be  a  time  when 
he  would  have  no  distinctive  character.  There 
would  be  a  time  in  the  history  of  every  person 
regenerated,  when  they  were  half  regenerated. 
Suppose  that  during  the  progress  of  this  work  of 
months  and  years,  the  person  should  die,  would 
not  "such  a  one  make  a  strange  specter  in  per- 
dition with  Grod's  renewing  work  half  finished 
upon  him?"  And  would  not  such  a  one  make 
an  equally  strange  spectre  in  heaven  ? 

The  word  of  God,  which  must  settle  all  such 
questions,  is  directly  against  the  notion  of  a  grad- 
ual regeneration.  As  to  the  nature  of  regener- 
ation, it  will  be  proper  to  note  that  it  implies  and 
includes  a  change  of  heart,  mind,  will,  disposition, 
and  feeling.  ''  There  are  no  new  powers  of  mind 
or  affections  of  the  soul  created,  but  the  soul,  with 
all  its  powers  and  affections,  is  renewed  and 
turned  from  wrong  to  right." 

Justification  and  regeneration  are  concomitant, 
that  is,  they  occur  at  the  same  time.     They  are 


72  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

separate  and  distinct  in  nature,  but  not  in  time. 
When  God  accepts  (justifies)  a  penitent  believer 
through  the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ,  he  renews 
(regenerates)  his  moral  nature  by  the  power  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  Justification  is  a  work  done  for 
us,  while  regeneration  is  a  work  done  in  us.  Jus- 
tification changes  our  relation  to  God,  removes  the 
guilt  of  sin,  and  delivers  from  the  punishment  due 
to  sin.  Regeneration  changes  our  moral  nature, 
takes  away  the  love  of  sin,  and  plants  in  the  heart 
the  principles  of  love  and  obedience.  It  is  a  re- 
newal of  our  fallen  nature  by  the  operations  of 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

"But  as  many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he 
power  to  become  the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them 
that  believe  on  his  name :  which  were  born,  not 
of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the 
will  of  man,  but  of  God."  (John  i.  12, 13.)  To  be 
born  of  God  is  neither  more  nor  less  than  to  be 
changed  and  renewed  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Paul, 
in  Titus  iii.  5,  speaking  of  the  same  work,  calls  it 
"the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Jesus  says 
they  are  born,  not  of  blood, — or  bloods,  as  the  orig- 
inal has  it, — not  by  natural  generation,  not  by  the 
will  of  man,  but  of  God — by  a  supernatural  power. 
It  is  more  than  a  mere  turning  around — more, 
vastly  more,  than  a  change  of  opinion.  By  natu- 
ral birth  we  are  the  sons  of  natural  parents,  so  by 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  73 

being  born  of  God  we  are  the  sons  of  God.  By 
natural  birth  we  partake  of  the  nature  of  our 
parents,  bone  of  their  bone  and  iiesh  of  their  flesh. 
By  a  spiritual  birth  we  partake  of  the  divine  na- 
ture communicated  to  us  by  the  Spirit ;  and  this 
same  Spirit  which  renews  our  moral  nature  brings 
us  iiHo  the  family  of  God.  It  is  called  the  Spirit 
of  adoption.  (Rom.  viii.  15.)  The  Spirit  by  which 
our  nature  is  changed,  and  by  which  we  are  adopt- 
ed into  the  family  of  God,  is  the  self- same  Spirit 
that  "  beareth  witness  with  our  spirit  that  we  are 
the  children  of  God." 

"Except  a  man  be  born  again,  he  can  not  see 
the  kingdom  of  God.  .  .  .  Except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  can  not  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God."  (John  iii.  3,  5.)  If  it 
should  "be  urged  that  the  Lord  meant  water  bap- 
tism when  he  uses  the  expression,  "born  of  water," 
it  is  evident  that  he  intended  that  it  should  be  un- 
derstood as  meaning  nothing  more  than  an  out- 
ward sign  of  the  inward  work  of  grace  wrought 
in  the  soul  by  the  Spirit.  This  is  clearly  implied 
in  the  sixth  verse  :  "That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh 
is  flesh ;  and  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spir- 
it." The  whole  scope  of  the  Savior's  discourse  was 
to  convince  ITicodemus  of  the  absolute  necessity  of 
a  spiritual  regeneration.  "  Ye  must  be  born 
aorain."     Outward  forms  and  ceremonies,  however 


74  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

valuable  in  their  places,  will  never  suffice  for  this 
inward  work.  The  soul  must  partake  of  the 
divine  nature;  and  this  can  only  be  accomplished 
by  a  complete  renewal  of  the  whole  moral  nature 
of  man.  ^'Born  of  the  Spirit."  "The  kingdom 
of  God  is  spiritual  and  holy;  and  that  which  is 
born  of  the  Spirit,  resembles  the  Spirit;  for  as  he 
is  who  begat,  so  is  he  who  is  begotten  of  him. 
Therefore  the  spiritual  regeneration  is  essentially 
necessary,  to  prepare  the  soul  for  a  holy  and  spir- 
itual kingdom." 

"Even  when  we  were  dead  in  sins,  hath  quick- 
ened us  together  with  Christ.  .  .  .  And  hath 
raised  us  up  together,  and  made  us  sit  together  in 
heavenly  places  in  Christ  Jesus."  (Eph.  ii.  5,  6.) 
To  quicken  is  to  give  life,  to  cause  to  live.  The 
words  "together  with  Christ"  have  reference  to 
the  resurrection  of  Christ.  As  God  had  raised 
Christ  from  the  dead,  so  they  were  raised  by  a 
spiritual  resurrection  into  a  spiritual  life.  God 
had  given  them  as  complete  a  resurrection  from  the 
death  of  sin  to  a  life  of  righteousness  as  he  had 
given  to  the  body  of  Christ  from  the  grave.  The 
Scriptures  represent  men,  while  in  a  state  of  na- 
ture, as  being  dead  in  sin ;  dead  in  their  souls ; 
dead  toward  God.  They  must  be  quickened, 
raised  up,  and  made  alive  to  God.  This  is  regen- 
eration.   It  is  instantaneous  and  complete. 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  75 

"And  that  ye  put  on  the  new  man,  which  after 
God  is  created  in  righteousness  and  true  holi- 
ness." (Eph.  iv.  24.)  "And  have  put  on  the  new 
man,  which  is  renewed  ^in  knowledge  after  the 
image  of  him  that  created  him."  (Col.  iii.  10.) 
"  For  we  are  his  workmanship,  created  in  Christ 
Jesus  unto  good  works."  (Eph.  ii.  10.)  These 
passages,  if  they  teach  anything  at  all,  teach  the 
doctrine  of  an  entire  moral  change.  God's  work- 
manship, created  not  in,  nor  by,  hut  unto  good 
works.  This  new  creation  was  produced  or 
wrought  in  us  hy  the  power  of  God.  This  be- 
getting, quickening,  renewing,  and  creating  anew 
all  comes  from  God,  and  is  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Pat  on  the  neio  man.  This  implies  that 
we  must  have  a  new  nature.  "Which  after  God 
is  created  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness."  The 
whole  image  of  God  is  to  be  traced  upon  the  soul. 
That  as  Adam  was  created  in  the  image  of  God, 
so  we  are  to  be  created  anew  in  the  same  image. 
In  other  words,  as  the  image  of  God  was  lost  to 
the  soul  by  the  fall  in  Adam,  it  is  to  be  restored 
to  the  soul  complete  by  regeneration  or  the  re- 
newing of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"If  any  man  be  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new 
creature."  (II.  Cor.  v.  17.)  "There  is  there- 
fore now  no  condemnation  to  them  which  are 
in    Christ    Jesus."      (Eom.   viii.   1.)      "A    new 


76  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

creature."  "There  is  no  condemnation  to  tliem 
wliicli  are  in  Christ  Jesus."  Why?  Be- 
cause they  have  passed  from  death  unto  life. 
They  are  new  creatures.  Their  whole  moral 
nature  has  been  changed,  and  the  image  of  God 
has  been  restored  to  the  soul,  ^ow  if  regener- 
ation is  what  Universalists  say  it  is,  a  mere  change 
of  opinion  or  turning  about,  without  any  change 
of  the  moral  nature,  and  if  it  is  the  work  of 
months  and  years,  as  they  assert  it  is,  then  a  man 
may  be  months  and  years  in  being  born  again ; 
months  and  years  in  being  created-  in  Christ 
Jesus;  months  and  years  in  getting  into  Christ 
Jesus;  months  and  years  in  putting  oft'  the 
old  man  and  putting  on  the  new  man;  months 
and  years  in  being  quickened ;  months  and  years 
in  being  born  of  the  Spirit.  But  some  men  do 
not  commence  this  work  until  near  the  close  of 
life,  only  a  few  hours  before  they  die.  When  and 
how  will  they  be  changed?  Then,  again,  some 
men  do  not  commence  at  all.  They  die  as  they 
live.  When  will  they  be  regenerated  ?  It  can  not 
take  place  in  death,  unless  men  are  months  and 
years  in  dying.  It  can  not  occur  in  the  resurrec- 
tion, unless  the  dead  are  months  and  years  in 
beino^  raised  from  the  dead.  The  whole  notion  of 
a  gradual  regeneration  is  preposterous.  It  is  con- 
trary to  all  the  representations  of  the  word  of  God. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  77 

la  this  argument  the  following  points  have 
been  established :  (1.)  Man  is  fallen  from  his 
original  state.  (2.)  All  men  in  consequence  of 
the  fall  are  depraved.  "All  have  sinned  and  come 
short  of  the  glory  of  Grod."  "All  have  gone  out 
of  the  way."  "  All  we  like  sheep  have  gone 
astray."  "All  are  under  the  condemnation  of  the 
law."  "We  are  born  in  sin."  "  The  carnal  mind 
is  enmity  against  God."  (3.)  It  has  been  shown 
from  plain,  unambiguous  passages  of  scripture 
that  regeneration  implies  and  includes  a  change 
of  our  whole  moral  nature,  wrought  in  the  soul 
by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  "Born  again." 
"Born  of  the  Spirit."  "Renewed  by  the  Holy 
Ghost."  "  Created  anew  unto  good  works." 
"Quickened."  "Anew  creature."  "Putting  off 
the  old  man,"  "Putting  on  the  new  man."  All 
these  passages  teach  as  plainly  as  language  can 
teach  anything,  that  regeneration  is  a  renewal  of 
our  fallen  nature.  (4.)  It  has  been  shown  that 
reason  and  common  sense  are  opposed  to  the 
notion  of  a  gradual  regeneration.  There  can  be 
no  medium  ground  between  life  and  death. 
.  How  then  can  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salva- 
tion of  all  men  be  established  upon  a  basis  which 
stands  diametrically  opposed  to  the  plain  teachings 
of  God's  word.  In  the  "  Theology  of  Universal- 
ism,"  as  set  forth  by  Mr.  Thayer,  the  author  denies 


78  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

human  depravity  and  a  spiritual  regeneration. 
He  argues  in  favor  of  the  absolute  rectitude  of  the 
moral  man,  and  a  gradual  regeneration.  In  this 
chapter  we  have  shown  that  both  these  notions 
are  contrary  to  reason  and  the  word  of  God,  and 
that  therefore  the  doctrine  of  Universalism  must 
be  false.  Universalism  has  a  system  of  doctrine 
peculiar  to  itself,  in  which  they  deny  almost  every 
fundamental  doctrine  as  held  and  taught  by  the 
orthodox  churches.  It  is  therefore  the  more  im- 
portant that  we  should  carefully  examine  the 
foundation  of  their  whole  theory.  If  the  ulti- 
mate holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men  be  true,  it 
is  true  according  to  their  method  of  interpreting 
the  Scriptures.  They  commence  by  denying  the 
doctrine  of  depravity  and  the  necessity  of  a  spir- 
itual regeneration.  The  reader  is  therefore  asked 
to  carefully  review  the  scripture  arguments  pre- 
sented in  this  chapter  in  proof  of  human  deprav- 
ity and  a  spiritual  regeneration,  and  therefore 
against  the  ''  Theology  of  Universalism." 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  79 


CHAPTER  YL 

THE   DIVINITY   OF    CHRIST 

It  has  been  clearly  demonstrated  that  "  man — 
by  worshiping — becomes  assimilated  to  the  moral 
character  of  the  object  lohich  he  worshipsJ^  The 
history  of  all  nations  abundantly  proves  this  propo- 
sition. The  worshiper  will  seek  to  cultivate  in 
himself  the  very  principles  he  attributes  to  the 
object  of  his  worship.  It  is  therefore  all-impor- 
tant that  the  worshiper  should  form  correct  no- 
tions of  the  object  or  being  he  worships.  Those 
who  charged  the  Savior  with  being  an  austere 
man  would  worship  him  as  a  being  rough,  harsh, 
stern,  and  vigorous,  exercising  authority  where 
he  had  no  right  so  to  do.  God,  by  the  mouth  of 
David,  speaks  of  those  who  thought  he  was  alto- 
gether such  a  one  as  themselves.  If  they  would 
worslnp  him  at  all,  it  would  be  with  the  feelings 
and  reverence  of  those  who  worship  a  man.  They 
would  not  in  thought  or  desire  rise  one  particle 
above  the  object  they  worship.  "To  become  as- 
similated to  the  image  of  the  object  worshiped 
must  be  the  end  of  desire  with  the  worshiper." 


80  UNTVBRSAL     RESTORATION 

Those  who  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  was  verily 
and  truly  God,  will  worship  and  obey  him  as 
though  he  were  God.  Those  who  believe  that  he 
was  only  a  man,  will  worship  and  obey  him  as 
though  he  were  a  man.  Our  purpose  in  this 
argument  is  to  show  that  Universalists  deny  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  which  the  Scriptures  on  the 
other  hand  abundantly  establish.  In  denying 
this  fundamental  doctrine  of  Christianity,  they 
present  Christ  to  a  lost  and  ruined  world  as  a 
being  whom  it  is  unsafe  to  trust  and  obey.  In- 
deed, they  hardly  know  where  in  the  scale  of 
being  to  place  him. 

In  order  to  place  this  subject  clearly  and  dis- 
tinctly before  the  eye  and  mind  of  the  reader,  we 
will  quote  from  a  few  Universalist  authors.  Rev. 
I.  D.  Williams,  in  his  ''  Exposition  of  Universal- 
ism,"  page  11,  says,  "We  can  acknowledge  no 
other  being  as  God,  but  him  alone.  Hence  with 
the  sentiments  of  the  polytheists,  who  believe  in 
many  gods,  the  pantheists,  who  believe  that  all  is 
God,  and  the  Trinitarians,  who  believe  in  three 
Gods  in  one,  and  one  in  three,  we  have  no  fellow- 
ship or  communion."  On  page  13  he  says  of 
Christ,  "  He  claimed  no  higher  title  than  the 
humble  one,  the  '  Son  of  man,'  and  if  he  claimed 
no  more  for  himself,  it  is  a  misguided  disciple  that 
claims  it  for  him." 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  81 

Mr.  Pingree,  in  his  debate  with  Mr.  Rice,  page 

229,  says,  "  I  have  already  shown  what  we  (Uni- 
versalists)  believe  on  that  subject:  we  do  not  call 
him  a  mere  man."  The  Bible  says  that  Christ 
was  a  man ;  that  he  was  endowed  with  ^  all  power 
in  heaven  and  in  earth,'  and  consequently  that  he 
was  something  more  than  a  mere  man. 

Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  "  Theology  of  Universalism," 
page  103,  says,  ^'  Constantly  he  is  spoken  of  in  the 
Bible  as  something  more  than  man."  On  page  107 
he  says,  ''He  (Christ)  is  not  God,  nor  an  angel, 
nor  an  archangel,  nor  a  man,  in  the  ordinary  defi- 
nition and  understanding  of  that  word."  Again, 
on  page  108  he  says,  "While  we  believe  in  and 
rejoicingly  acknowledge  the  pre-eminence  of  Christ 
in  all  things,  we  reject  the  doctrine  of  his  deity 
or  his  equality  with  God." 

From  these  authors — and  others,  from  whom 
we  might  quote  if  necessary — it  is  perfectly  clear 
that  Universalists  deny  the  doctrine  of  Christ's 
supreme  divinity.  Can  any  man,  whether  learned 
or  unlearned,  tell  us  what  they  do  believe  concern- 
ing the  person  and  character  of  Christ  ?  He  is 
not  God,  nor  an  angel,  nor  an  archangel,  nor  man, 
but  something  more  than  a  mere  man.  What  is 
that  something  more  ?  Is  it  a  created  or  uncre- 
ated something  ?  Is  it  a  God-nature  or  a  man- 
nature?     We  can  form  some  conceptions  of  the 

6 


82  XTNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

character  of  God  from  the  nature  of  his  works — 
"the  heavens  declare  his  glory;"  we  can  form 
some  conceptions  of  the  characters  of  men  and 
angels;  hut  of  a  being  that  is  neither  God,  nor 
man,  nor  an  angel,  and  yet  something  more  than 
a  mere  man,  we  can  form  no  conceptions  at  all. 
It  would  be  a  sin  to  worship,  and  unsafe  to  obey 
and  trust  in  any  such  being. 

But  we  will  turn  to  the  word  of  God,  and  see  if 
we  can  find  out  what  sort  of  being  Christ  is. 
Whatever  he  is  the  Scriptures  must  inform  us.  He 
is  called  God.  "  Thy  throne,  0  God,  is  forever 
and  ever :  a  scepter  of  righteousness  is  the  scepter 
of  thy  kingdom."  (Hebrews  i.  8.)  This  is  a  quo- 
tation from  the  forty-fifth  psalm.  ]N"o  one  in  read- 
ins:  this  psalm  would  doubt  for  a  moment  that 
David  meant  the  everlasting  God.  Paul  in  the 
above  quotation  applies  the  language  of  the  psalm- 
ist to  Jesus  Christ;  therefore,  Jesus  Christ  must  be 
God.  "But  unto  the  Son  he  saith,  Thy  throne, 
0  God,  is  forever  and  ever  :  a  scepter  of  righteous- 
ness is  the  scepter  of  thy  kingdom."  The  most 
sound  divines  have  ever  been  of  the  opinion  that 
these  words  were  addressed  by  God  the  Father 
unto  God  the  Son.  If  Christ  is  not  God,  why  did 
the  sacred  writers  call  him  God  ? 

"For  unto  us  a  child  is  born,  unto  us  a  son  is 
given  :  and  the  government  shall  be  upon  his  shoul- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  83 

der:  and  his  name  shall  be  called  Wonderful, 
Counsellor,  The  mighty  God,  The  everlasting 
Father,  The  Prince  of  Peace."  (Isaiah  ix.  6.)  Of 
whom  does  the  prophet  speak ?  Surely  no  man  will 
deny  that  this  language  refers  to  Jesus  Christ* 
Could  such  language  as,  ^'The  mighty  God,  the 
everlasting  Father,"  be  applied  to  any  being  less 
than  God  ?  And  yet  it  is  applied  to  Jesus  Christ. 
Therefore,  Jesus  Christ  must  be  God.  If  the 
writers  of  the  Old  and  Kew  Testament  intended 
to  affirm  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  could 
not  have  selected  any  words  that  would  more 
clearly  establish  that  fact.  If  they  did  not  intend 
to  affirm  this,  they  were  very  unfortunate  in  the 
use  of  terms.  If  in  reading  a  book  you  should 
find  such  words  as,  "The  mighty  God,  the  ever- 
lasting Father,"  you  would  not  think  of  any  being 
less  than  the  very  eternal  God. 

"  Look  unto  me,  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends  of 
the  earth :  for  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else. 
I  have  sworn  by  myself,  the  word  is  gone  out  of 
my  mouth  in  righteousness,  and  shall  not  return, 
That  unto  me  every  knee  shall  bow,  every  tongue 
shall  swear."  (Isaiah  xlv.  22-23.)  This  text  upon 
its  very  face  concerns  Christ.  It  has  imme- 
diate reference  to  gospel  times.  "  I  am  God,  and 
there  is  none  else."  "  Unto  me  every  knee  sliidl 
bow,  and  every  tongue  shall  swear."     In  Philip- 


84  UNtVERSAL    RES'tOKATlON 

plans  ii.  10  Paul  declares  that  at  the  name  of 
Jesus  every  knee  should  bow,  and  every  tongue 
confess^  To  show  still  further  that  the  prophet 
refers  to  Christ,  we  will  quote  from  Romans  xiv. 
10-12:  "But  why  dost  thou  judge  thy  brother? 
or  why  dost  thou  set  at  naught  thy  brother?  for  we 
shall  all  stand  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ. 
For  it  is  written^  As  I  live,  saith  the  Lord,,  every 
knee  shall  bow  to  me,  and  every  tongue  shall  con- 
fess to  God.  So  then  every  one  of  us  shall  give 
account  of  himself  to  God."  In  this  text  we  are 
assured  that  we  shall  all  stand  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ;  that  every  knee  shall  bow, 
and  every  tongue  confess  to  God.  To  pi'ove  this, 
Paul  quotes  from  Isaiah  xlv.  23 :  "  Thus  clearly 
affirming  that  Hhe  Lord'  spoken  of  by  Isaiah  is  no 
other  than  ^  Christ,'  and  that  Christ  is  God." 

In  further  proof  of  the  deity  of  Christ,  we  will 
quote  his  own  language.  "Before  Abraham  was, 
I  am."  (John  viii.  56-58.)  This  language  not  only 
proves  the  pre-existence  of  Christ,  but  his  eternal 
Godhead.  God  said  unto  Moses,  "I  AM  THAT 
I  AM."  (Exodus  iii.  14.)  "Before  Abraham  was, 
I  am."  In  this  the  Savior  uses  this  very  language 
in  reference  to  himself,  which  expresses  nothing 
more  and  nothing  less  than  the  name  of  the  true 
God.  Turn  to  Revelation  i.  17,  18,  "And  w^hen  I 
saw  him,  I  fell  at  his  feet  as  dead.     And  he  laid  his 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  85 

right  hand  upon  me,  saymg  unto  me,  J^'ear  not;  I 
am  the  first  and  the  last :  I  am  he  that  liveth,  and 
was  dead;  and,  behold,  I  am  alive for-evermore." 
Who  was  it  that  said  to  John  in  this  passage, 
"Fear  not;  I  am  the  iirst  and  the  last?"  It  was 
Jesus  Christ  and  none  other,  for  he  immediately 
adds,  "I  am  he  that  liveth,  and  was  dead;  and, 
behold,  I  am  alive  for  evermore."  Kow  turn  to 
Isaiah  xliv.  6,  ''  Thus  saith  the  Lord  the  King  of 
Israel,  and  his  Redeemer  the  Lord  of  hosts ;  I  am 
the  Iirst,  and  I  am  the  last ;  and  besides  me  there  is 
no  God."  It  is  perfectly  clear  that  he  who  says, 
/  am  the  first  and  the  last,  is  Jehovah,  for  in  the 
last  sentence  he  says,  "Besides  me  there  is  no  God." 
But  Jesus  Christ,  in  Revelation  i.  17,  18,  says,  "1 
am  the  first  and  the  last."  From  this  we  can 
reach  but  one  conclusion,  which  is  this,  that  Jesus 
Christ  must  be  God. 

"I  am  Alpha  and  Omega,  the  beginning  and 
the  ending,  saith  the  Lord,  which  is,  and  which 
was,  and  which  is  to  come,  the  Almighty."  (Rev- 
elation i.  8.)  Alpha  and  Omega  are  the  first  and 
last  letters  of  the  Greek  alphabet.  The  natural 
meaning  of  the  first  sentence  in  this  text  is  this, 
"I  am  from  eternity  to  eternity;"  for  he  immedi- 
ately adds,  "  I  am  the  beginning  and  the  ending — 
the  author  and  cause  of  all  things."  He  not  only 
declares  himself  to  be  the  first  and  the  last,  the 


86  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

beginning  and  the  ending,  but  says  that  he,  the 
first  and  the  last,  is  the  Almighty — the  all-powerful. 
Thus  Jesus  Christ  declares  himself  to  be  the  very 
eternal  God.  Jesus  says,  "  I  am  the  root  and  the 
offspring  of  David."  (Revelation  xxii.  16.)  He 
is  the  root  of  David  as  to  his  divine  nature,  and 
he  is  the  offspring  of  David  as  to  his  human 
nature.  In  other  words,  he  is  David's  God,  for 
he  is  the  Creator  of  all  things,  and  "  without  him 
was  not  anything  made  that  was  niade."  Thus 
we  have  in  Christ's  own  words  the  repeated  dec- 
laration that  he  is  God.  Rev.  I.  D.  Williams, 
whose  language  I  quoted  in  the  opening  of  this 
chapter,  says  that  Christ  "claimed  no  higher  title 
than  the  humble  one,  the  'Son  of  man.'"  ]S'ow 
while  it  is  true  that  Jesus  Christ  did  speak  of  him- 
self as  the  "Son  of  man"  and  the  offspring  of 
David,  he  also  claimed  for  himself  a  mnqh  higher 
title;  he  claimed  that  he  was  the  "I  AM;"  the 
"first  and  the  last; "the  "beginning  and  the  end- 
ing;" the  "  root  of  David  ; "  the  "Almighty." 

In  I.  Timothy  iii.  16,  Paul,  when  speaking  of 
Christ,  says  emphatically  tliat  he  was  "God  manifest 
in  the  flesh."  I.  John  v.  20  says  of  Christ,  "  This  is 
the  true  God,  and  eternal  life."  In  both  these 
passages  Jesus  Christ  is  called  God,  and  in  the 
latter  he  is  called  the  "  true  God."  Mr.  William- 
son says  that  as  Christ  claimed  no  more  for  him- 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  87 

self  than  the  "Son  of  man,"  ''it  is  a  misguided  dis- 
ciple that  claims  it  for  him.^'^  Both  Paul  and  John 
must  have  been  misguided  disciples,  for  they  did 
claim  for  Christ  more  than  the  ^'Son  of  man." 
They  claimed  that  he  was  God,  the  "  true  God, 
and  eternal  life." 

We  will  examine  but  one  more  passage  in  this 
connection.  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and 
the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God. 
The  same  was  in  the  beginning  wdth  God.  All 
things  were  made  by  him;  and  without  him  w^as 
not  anything  made  that  was  made."  (John  i.  1-3.) 
In  the  fourteenth  verse  John  says,  "And  the  Word 
was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us."  In  the  first 
verse  we  have  the  fact  stated,  "the  Word  was 
with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God."  And  this 
Word,  that  was  in  the  beginning,  that  was  with 
God,  and  that  was  God,  was  made  flesh  and  dw^lt 
among  lis.  "All  things  were  made  by  him." 
This  Word  was  in  the  beginning,  which  proves 
that  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  this  Word,  was  no  part 
of  creation,  for  he  was  before  creation.  "All 
things  were  made  by  him;  and  without  him  was 
not  anything  made  that  was  made."  "And  the 
Word  was  made  flesh."  Dr.  Clarke  on  comment- 
ing on  this  says:  "  That  very  person  who  was  in 
the  beginning,  who  was  with  God,  and  who  was 
God  (v.  1.),  in  the  fullness  of  time  became  flesh. 


88  UNIVEESAL    RESTORATION 

became  incarnate  by  the  power  of  tbe  Holy  Ghost, 
in  the  womb  of  the  virgin.  Allowing  this  apostle 
to  have  written  by  divine  inspiration,  is  not  this 
verse  (14),  taken  in  connection  with  verse  one,  an 
absolute  and  incontestable  proof  of  the  proper  and 
eternal  Godhead  of  Christ  Jesus." 

We  will  now  pass  to  notice  that  the  attributes, 
which  alone  belong  to  God,  are  ascribed  to  Jesus 
Christ. 

1.  Eternity.  It  will  hardly  be  denied  that  this 
is  one  of  the  essential  attributes  of  Jehovah.  In 
Isaiah  ix.  6,  the  prophet,  in  speaking  of  Christ, 
calls  him  the  ''  everlasting  Father,"  which  literally 
signifies  the  "  Father  of  Eternity."  *'  Out  of  thee 
(Bethlehem)  shall  he  come  forth,  unto  me  that  is  to 
be  ruler  in  Israel ;  whose  goings  forth  have  been 
from  of  old,  from  everlasting."  (Micah  v.  2.)  Of 
whom  does  the  prophet  speak?  By  turning  to 
Matthew  ii.  3-6,  it  will  be  seen  that  he  is  speaking 
of  Christ,  "  whose  goings  forth  have  been  from  of 
old,  from  everlasting J^  "Before  the  mountains 
were  brought  forth,  or  ever  thou  hadst  formed  the 
earth  and  the  world,  even  from  everlasting  to  ever- 
lasting, thou  art  God."  (Psalms  xc.  2.)  Who 
formed  the  earth  and  the  world  ?  John  i.  2  says, 
when  speaking  of  Christ,  that  "all  things  were 
made  by  him ;  and  without  him  was  not  any  thing 
made  that  was  made."     Then  he  existed  before 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  89 

the  mountains  were  brought  forth  and  before  the 
earth  was  formed,  even  from  everlasting  to  everlast- 
ing. "Christ  formed  the  earth  and  the  world, 
therefore  Christ  is  God  from  everlasting  to  ever- 
lasting." In  Isaiah  xliv.  6  Jehovah  says,  "  I  am 
the  iirst,  and  I  am  the  last ;  and  besides  me  there  is 
no  God."  In  Revelation  i.  17,  18,  Jesus  said  to 
John,  '^  I  am  the  first  and  the  last," — the  beginning 
and  the  ending,  the  Alpha  and  the  Omega, 
l^ow,  if  God  alone  is  from  everlasting  to  everlast- 
ing, if  he  is  the  first  and  the  last,  then  Jesus  Christ 
must  be  God,  for  these  very  perfections  are  ascribed 
to  him.  Dr.  Lee  when  speaking  of  the  eternity  of 
Christ  presents  it  in  this  forcible  manner:  "He 
who  created  all  things  must  have  existed  before 
anything  was  created.  He  who  existed  before 
anything  was  created  must  have  always  existed. 
But  Jesus '  Christ  did  create  all  things,  and  he 
existed  before  anything  was  created,  therefore 
Jesus  Christ  is  eternal." 

2.  Omniscience.  God  alone  is  omniscient.  If 
Jesus  Christ  is  omniscient,  then  Jesus  Christ  must 
be  God.  What  do  the  Scriptures  teach?  "And 
Jesus  knowing  their  thoughts  said,  Wherefore 
think  ye  evil  in  your  hearts?"  (Matt.  ix.  4.) 
"But  Jesus  did  not  commit  himself  unto  them, 
because  he  knew  all  men,  and  needed  not  that  any 
should  testify  of  man ;  for  he  knew  what  was  in 


90  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

man."  (John  ii.  24-25.)  "  Thou,  Lord,  which  know- 
est  the  hearts  of  all  men."  (Acts  i.  24.)  IsTo 
created  being  can  know  the  thoughts  of  man.  No 
created  being  can  know,  what  is  in  man.  When 
Jesus  asked  Peter  for  the  third  time  whether  he 
loved  him,  Peter  said,  "Lord,  thou  knowest  all 
things;  thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee."  Peter 
must  have  been  one  of  Mr.  Williamson's  "  mis- 
guided disciples,"  for  in  this  positive  declaration 
he  attributes  to  Christ  a  perfection  that  no  being 
less  than  God  ever  possessed.  It  is  said  in  John 
vi.  64,  that  "  Jesus  knew  from  the  beginning  who 
they  were  that  believed  not,  and  who  should  be- 
tray him."  How  could  he  know  all  these  things 
if  he  were  not  omniscient?  And  if  Jesus  Christ 
is  omniscient  he  must  be  God. 

3.  Omnijneseiice.  This  perfection  or  attribute 
is  ascribed  to  Christ.  Lideed  our  Lord  himself 
laid  claim  to  it.  Jesus  said,  "Lo,  I  am, with  you 
alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world."  (Matt, 
xxviii.  20.)  "Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  to- 
gether in  my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them." 
(Matt.  xvii.  20.)  Ministers  of  the  cross  of  Christ 
have  always  believed  that  Jesus  would  go  with 
them.  Evangelical  Christians  in  all  time  past  have 
expected  the  presence  of  Christ,  whenever  and 
wherever  they  met  in  his  name.  How  could  they 
expect  his   presence  if  he   is   not   omnipresent? 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  91 

Since  tliuusaiids  of  such  assemblies  are  gathered 
together  at  the  same  time,  how  could  Christ  fulfill 
his  promises  if  he  were  not  omnipresent?  Thou- 
sands of  ministers  are  now  at  work  in  the  Master's 
vineyard,  scattered  all  over  the  land.  Each  claims 
the  [)romise,  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world."  "  Christ  can  not  be 
in  [Jnitarian  assemblies  and  in  Unitarian  worship, 
according  to  their  theory.  They  can  have  no 
present  Christ;  none  in  their  preaching;  none  in 
tlieir  worship;  none  in  their  joys;  none  in  their 
sorrows  ;  none  in  life,  and  none  in  death.  If  their 
theory  be  true,  their's  must  be  a  Christless  journey 
to  the  tomb." 

4.  Omnijjotence.  This  attribute  is  essential  to 
the  nature  of  an  infinite,  independent,  and  perfect 
being.  It  implies  almighty  power.  Does  Jesus 
Christ  claim  this?  "I  am  Alpha  and  Omega,  the 
beginning  and  the  ending,  saith  the  Lord,  which 
is,  and  which  was,  and  which  is  to  come,  the  Al- 
mighty." (Rev.  i.  8.)  I  will  now  quote  two  very 
important  passages.  "  In  him  dwelleth  all  the  full- 
ness of  tlie  Godhead  bodily."  (Col.  ii.  9.)  "  For 
the  invisible  things  of  him  from  the  creation  of 
the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  understood  by 
the  things  that  are  made,  even  his  eternal  power 
and  Godhead ;  so  that  they  are  without  excuse." 
(Rom.  i.  20.)     Dr.  Clarke  says,   "  By  the  Godhead, 


92  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

or  Deity,  we-are  to  understand  the  state  or  being 
of  the  divine  nature,  and  by  the  fullness  of  that 
Deity,  the  infinite  attributes  essential  to  such  a 
nature.  Bodily  signifies,  truly,  really,  not  only 
efii'ectively,  as  God  dwells  in  good  men,  but  suh- 
stantially,  or  personally .^^  IlTow,  as  it  was  by  this 
eternal  power  and  Godhead,  that  all  things  were 
created,  and  as  all  the  fullness  of  this  Godhead 
bodily  dwelt  in  Christ,  and  as  omnipotence  is  an 
essential  attribute  of  the  Godhead,  therefore 
Jesus  Christ  is  omnipotent;  and  if  omnipotent,  he 
must  be  God.  In  further  proof  of  the  omnipo- 
tence of  Christ,  I  will  quote  two  passages.  "  All 
things  were  made  by  him ;  and  without  him  was 
not  anything  made  that  was  made."  (John  i.  3.) 
"  By  him  were  all  things  created,  that  are  in 
heaven,  and  that  are  in  earth."  (Col.  i.  16.)  Could 
any  being  not  omnipotent  create  the  universe  ?  If 
we  turn  to  Genesis  i.  1,  we  have  this  fact  clearly 
stated.  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven 
and  the  earth."  John  and  Paul  afiirm  that  Jesus 
Chvi^t  creaied  all  things;  all  things  in  heaven  and  in 
earth:  and.  ivithout  him,  loas  not  anything  made  that 
was  made;  therefore,  Jesus  Christ  must  be  God. 
5,  Immutability.  Ko  being  in  the  universe  can 
claim  this  perfection  but  God  himself.  If  Jesus 
Christ  is  immutable  he  must  be  God.  The  only 
question  then,  is  this :  Do  the  Scriptures  warrant 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  93 

US  ill  the  belief  that  Jesus  Christ  is  immutable? 
"  Jesus  Christ  the  same  yesterday,  and  to-day,  and 
forever."  (Hebrews  xiii.  8.)  Paul,  in  speaking 
of  Christ,  says,  "And,  thou,  Lord,  in  the  begin- 
ning hast  laid  the  foundation  of  the  earth;  and 
the  heavens  are  the  works  of  thine  hands.  They 
shall  perish,  but  thou  remainest :  and  they  all  shall 
wax  old  as  doth  a  garment :  *  *  but  thou  art  the 
same,  and  thy  years  shall  have  no  end."  (Hebrews 
i.  10-12.)  This  last  text  is  a  quotation  from  the 
one  hundred  and  second  psalm,  and  is  spoken  to 
Jesus  Christ.  From  these  two  passages  it  is  per- 
fectly clear  that  the  sacred  writers  believed  that 
Christ  was  immutable. 

Thus  far  in  the  argument  it  has  been  proved 
from  plain,  unambiguous  passages  of  scripture, 
that  Jesus  Christ  was  "  called  God ; "  that  '^eternity, ^^ 
omniscience,  omnipresence,  omnipotence,  and  immut- 
ability  were  all  ascribed  to  him ;  hence,  "  If  Jesus 
Christ  were  not  God  the  writers  of  the  ISTew 
Testament  discovered  great  injudiciousness  in  the 
choice  of  their  words,  and  adopted  a  very  incautious 
and  dangerous  style."  In  further  proof  of  the  de- 
ity of  Christ  I  shall  add  two  more  arguments. 

The  works  ascribed  to  Christ  are  such  as  no 
being  but  God  could  perform.  '*A11  things  were 
made  by  him ;  and  without  him  was  not  anything 
made  that  Vas  made."     (John  i.  3.)     Verse  10. 


94  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

"He  was  in  the  world,  and  the  world  was  made 
by  him."  ''For  by  him  were  all  things  created, 
that  are  in  heaven,  and  that  are  in  earth,  visible 
and  invisible,  whether  they  be  thrones,  or  domin- 
ions, or  principalities,  or  powers :  all  things  were 
created  by  him,  and  for  him :  and  he  is  before  all 
things,  and  by  him  all  things  consist."  (Col.  i.  16, 
17.)  'Now  add  to  these  passages  Genesis  i.  1 — "In 
the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven  and  the 
earth" — and  you  have  it  proved  as  clearly  as  lan- 
guage can  prove  anything  that  Jesus  Christ  must  be 
God.  Dr.  Clarke,  in  commenting  on  Colossians  i. 
16,  17,  submits  the  following  thoughts:  "Four 
things  are  here  asserted.  1.  That  Jesus  Christ  i»«» 
the  Creator  of  the  universe;  of  all  things  visible  and 
invisible;  of  all  things  that  had  a  beginning,  whether 
they  exist  in  time  or  in  eternity.  2.  That  whatso- 
ever was  created  was  created  for  himself;  that  he 
was  the  sole  end  of  his  own  work.  3.  That  he 
was  'prior  to  all  creation,  to  all  beings,  whether  in 
the  visible  or  invisible  worlds.  4.  That  he  is  the 
preserver  and  governor  of  all  things,  for  by  him  oil 
things  consist J^  It  must  be  admitted  that  creation 
requires  nothing  less  than  unlimited  power — abso- 
lute omnipotence.  ITow,  if  Paul  and  John  under- 
stood the  terms  they  used  in  the  foregoing  pas- 
sages, they  certainly  intended  to  ascribe  to  Jesus 
Christ  whatever  power  was  required  t5  create  the 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  95 

universe.  And  as  no  being  possesses  that  power 
but  God,  we  are  forced  to  the  conckision  that 
Jesus  Christ  must  be  God;  for  '^all  things  were 
made  by  him,,' ^ — all  things,  in  heaven  and  in  earth; 
"  and  loithont  him  loas  not  any  thing  made  that  was 
made;"  for  "he  is  before  all  things." 

Jesus  Christ  is  not  only  the  Creator  of  all 
things,  but  he  is  the  object  of  divine  worship.  It 
is  idolatry  to  worship  any  being  but  God  himself. 
When  John  was  on  the  island  of  Patmos,  and  an 
angel  appeared  to  him,  he  was  so  overpowered  by 
his  presence  that  he  fell  down  and  was  about  to 
worship  him;  but  the  angel  said,  "See  thou  do  it 
not:  for  I  am  thy  fellow-servant,  and  of  thy  breth- 
ren the  prophets,  and  of  them  which  keep  the 
sayings  of  this  book :  worship  God."  ISTow  add 
to  this  the  saying  of  Christ  himself,  '^  Then  saith 
Jesus  unto  him.  Get  thee  hence,  Satan:  for  it  is 
written.  Thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God, 
and  him  only  shalt  thou  serve."  (Matthew  iv.  10.) 
It  is  written  in  Deuteronomy  vi.  13,  and  x.  20.  It 
is  written  in  Exodus  xx.  3-5.  From  these  pas- 
sages it  is  perfectly  clear  that  God  is  the  only  object 
of  religious  worship.  Kow  if  the  Scriptures  teach 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  to  be  worshiped,  then  it  proves, 
beyond  all  question,  that  he  must  be  God.  ''And 
behold,  there  came  a  leper  and  worshiped  him, 
saying.  Lord,  if  thou  wilt,  thou  canst  make  me 


96  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

clean."  (Matthew  viii.  2.)  "And  as  they  went 
to  tell  his  disciples,  behold,  Jesus  met  them,  say- 
ing. All  hail.  And  they  came  and  held  him  by 
the  feet,  and  worshiped  him."  (Matthew  xxviii.  9.) 
"  And  it  came  to  pass,  while  he  blessed  them,  he 
was  parted  from  them,  and  carried  up  into  heaven. 
And  they  worshiped  him,  and  returned  to  Jerusa- 
lem with  great  joy."  (Luke  xxiv.  51,  52.)  ''And 
again,  when  he  bringeth  in  the  first-begotten  into 
the  world,  he  saith,  And  let  all  the  angels  of  God 
worship  himy  (Hebrews  i.  6.)  "  To  w^orship  any 
creature  is  idolatry;  and  God  resents  idolatry 
more  than  any  other  evil.  Jesus  Christ  can  be  no 
creature,  else  the  angels  who  worship  him  must 
be  guilty  of  idolatry,  and  God  the  author  of  that 
idolatry,  who  commanded  those  angels  to  worship 
Christ."  From  these  passages  it  must  appear  to 
every  candid  mind  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  object 
of  worship,  both  for  men  and  angels.  And  from 
Revelation  v.  11-13,  it  appears  that  he  is  wor- 
shiped by  all  the  hosts  in  heaven. 

In  summing  up  upon  this  argument  I  wish  to 
state  that  I  have  sought  to  make  this  point  par- 
ticularly clear,  for  the  whole  system  of  Christianity 
proceeds  upon  the  idea  that  Jesus  Christ  is  verily 
and  truly  God.  If  we  reject  this  we  must  reject 
the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement;  and  if  we 
reject  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement  we  must 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  97 

reject  the  doctrine   of  justification  by  faith.     In 
fact,  it  sweeps  away  every  fundamental  doctrine 
of  our  holy  religion.     If  Universalism  be  true,  we 
have  nothing  left  but  some  sort  of  created  Savior. 
He  is  not  God,  nor  an  angel,  nor  a  mere  man.     He 
is  something ;  no  one  can  tell  who  nor  what.   But  in 
this  argument  it  has  been  shown  that  Jesus  Christ 
is   God.     God  manifest  in  the  flesh;   the  Alpha 
and  Omega,  the  first  and  the  last;  the  root  and  off- 
spring of  David ;  the  mighty  God,  the  everlasting 
Father;   the  Creator  and  upholder  of  all  things. 
Let  it  be  distinctly  understood  that  the  ultimate 
holiness  and  salvation   of  all  men,  as  held  and 
taught  by  Universalists,  goes  upon  the  presump- 
tion that  Jesus  Christ  was  a  created  being;  some- 
thing more  than  a  mere  man,  and  something  less 
than   God.      They  hold  that  this  created  Savior 
came  into  the  world  and  suffered   and  died  for 
some  purpose,  but  not  in  our  stead;  not  as  our 
surety;  not  to  render  satisfaction  to  the  law;  not 
to  relieve  us  from  any  of  the  penalty  due  to  sin ; 
not  to  save  us  from  the  guilt  of  sin.     For  what, 
then  ?   Universalists  themselves  must  answer,  if  it 
is  answered  at  all.     With  their  view  of  the  char- 
acter and  mission  of  Christ,  the  humble  believer, 
and   penitent,    might  well   exclaim,   "They  have 
taken    away    my    Lord,    and  I  know  not  where 
they  have  laid  him." 
7 


100         UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

meaning  when  he  says,  To  be  carnally -minded  is 
deathJ'  According  to  Mr.  Ballon,  then,  to  believe 
in  the  vicarious  sufferings  of  Jesus  Christ  is  car- 
nal-mindedness.  What  is  it  then  to  believe  in 
mere  human  suffering;  that  is,  that  the  sinner 
himself  can,  by  suffering,  render  satisfaction  to 
the  law?  Again  let  it  be  asked.  For  what  and  for 
whom  did  Jesus  Christ  suffer  ? 

Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  Theology  of  Universalism, 
page  136,  says,  "The  death  of  Christ  is  not  vicari- 
ous; he  did  not  suffer  as  our  substitute."  On 
page  138  he  says,  "  The  constant  declaration  is 
that  Christ  offered  himself  a  sacrifice  for  sin,  and 
not  as  a  substitute  to  release  man  from  punish- 
ment." This  is  a  very  remarkable  declaration, 
that  Christ  offered  himself  a  sacrifice  for  sin  and 
yet  does  not  release  man  from  any  of  the  punish- 
ments due  to  sin.  We  must  suffer  for  our  sins  all 
the  same  as  if  Christ  had  not  died  at  all.  I  will 
give  another  quotation  from  Mr.  Thayer,  page 
135,  "It  is  plain,"  he  says,  "that  though  Christ 
does  not,  as  our  substitute,  save  us  from  punish- 
ment by  suffering  for  us,  yet  he  saves  us  from  sin, 
by  leading  us  away  from  it  into  the  paths  of  life 
and  peace."  Let  it  be  observed  that  the  author 
most  emphatically  denies  that  Christ  died  as  our 
substitute;  yet  he  saves  us  from  sin — that  is,  he 
leads  us  away  from  sin.     But  how  does   Christ 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  101 

save  men  from  sins  already  committed  ?  He  will 
lead  those  away  from  sin  who  will  allow  them- 
selves to  be  led  by  him.  But  thousands  do  not 
follow  Christ;  they  live  in  sin  every  day,  and 
finally  die  in  sin.  How  does  he  save  them  from 
past  sins? 

I  have  been  careful  to  state  the  exact  views  of 
Universalist  authors  on  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement.  Universalism  promises  salvation  to 
the  whole  race  of  man,  and  yet  denies  the  only 
foundation  upon  which  salvation  can  be  reached. 
If  the  sufferings  of  Christ  were  not  vicarious,  if 
he  did  not  render  satisfaction  to  the  law,  the  hope 
of  the  world  dies.  To  settle  this  question  we  must 
appeal  directly  to  the  word  of  God.  Let  it  be  dis- 
tinctly understood  that  if  the  doctrine  of  the  vica- 
rious sufterings  of  Christ  be  true,  the  whole  system 
of  Universalism  falls  to  the  ground.  Universalism 
goes  upon  the  theory  that  every  man  must  sufier 
the  full  penalty  of  the  law.  This,  the  author  of 
the  "  Exposition  of  Universalism^^  says,  is  "  one  of 
their  peculiar  doctrines,"  which,  of  course,  in- 
volves a  complete  rejection  of  the  glorious  doctrine 
of  "  vicarious  atonement J^  Before  entering  directly 
upon  the  scripture  argument,  I  wish  to  state 
clearly  and  distinctly  that  for  God  to  forgive  sin 
without  a  satisfaction  does  not  accord  with  any 
of  his  perfections.     It  is  against  his  holiness,  his 


102  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATrON 

justice,  hisVisdom,  and  his  veracity.  "JSTor  does  it 
comport  with  the  great  love  and  affection  of  God 
to  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  said  to  be  his  beloved 
Son,  the  dear  Son  of  his  love,  to  send  him  into 
this  world  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  to  be 
vilified  and  abused  by  the  w^orst  of  men,  to  be 
buffeted,  lashed,  and  tortured  by  a  set  of  miscre- 
ants, and  to  put  him  to  the  most  cruel  and  shame- 
ful death,  if  sin  could  have  been  forgiven  without 
all  this,  by  a  hint,  a  nod,  a  word  saying,  'Thy 
sins  are  forgiven  thee,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved?  '" 
Where  is  the  greatness  of  this  love  if  salvation 
could  have  been  secured  in  any  other  way?  If 
God  could  forgive  sin  without  any  satisfaction 
being  rendered  to  the  law,  why  all  the  suffering 
and  anguish  of  his  beloved  Son? 

But  what  do  the  Scriptures  teach  concerning 
the  work  of  Christ  and  the  object  of  his  mission 
into  this  world?  "He  shall  save  Ms  people  from 
their  sins."  (Matthew  i.  21.)  'Not  from  sinning 
merely,  but  from  sin;  and  if  from  sin,  from  the 
evil  and  consequences  of  sin.  A  man  can  not  be 
saved  from  sin  and  then  punished  for  the  sins 
from  which  he  has  been  saved ;  nor  can  a  man  be 
punished  for  his  sins  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law, 
and  then  be  saved  from  them.  "  The  Son  of  man 
came  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many."  (Matt. 
XX.  28.)     For  how  many?  Paul  says,  "He  gave 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  103 

himself  a  ransom  for  all."  (I.  Timotliy  ii.  6.) 
The  word  ransom  signifies  the  price  paid  for  the 
release  or  redemption  of  a  prisoner  or  captive. 
Dr.  Clarke,  in  his  comment  on  this  latter  text,  says, 
''  The  word  used  here,  and  applied  to  the  death  of 
Christ,  signifies  that  ransom  which  consists  in  the 
exchange  of  one  person  for  another,  or  the  re- 
demption of  life  by  life."  Christ  gave  his  life,  that 
others  through  him  and  by  him  might  have  eter- 
nal life. 

We  will  examine  another  class  of  scriptures. 
*'  God  sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made 
under  the  law,  to  redeem  them  that  were  under 
the  law,  that  we  might  receive  the  adoption  of 
sons."  (Galatians  iv.  4,  5.)  How  did  Christ  re- 
deem them  that  were  under  the  law  ?  The  same 
apostle  tells  us,  in  Galatians  iii.  13.  "  Christ  hath 
redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being  made 
a  curse  for  us."  We  are  not  to  understand  from 
this  that  Christ  was  changed  into  a  curse,  but 
took  the  curse  of  the  law  upon  himself.  In  other 
words,  he  was  "  made  an  atonement  for  our  sins ; 
for  whatever  was  offered  as  an  atonement  for  sin 
was  considered  as  bearing  the  punishment  due  to 
sin."  In  II.  Corinthians  v.  21  the  apostle  says, 
*'  He  hath  made  him  to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no 
sin."  Christ  knew  no  sin,  for  he  was  "  without  spot, 
and  blameless."     He  was  pure  and  innocent.    Yet 


102  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATFON 

justice,  hisVisdom,  and  his  veracity.  ''Nor  does  it 
comport  with  the  great  love  and  affection  of  God 
to  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  said  to  be  his  beloved 
Son,  the  dear  Son  of  his  love,  to  send  him  into 
this  world  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  to  be 
vilified  and  abused  by  the  worst  of  men,  to  be 
buffeted,  lashed,  and  tortured  by  a  set  of  miscre- 
ants, and  to  put  him  to  the  most  cruel  and  shame- 
ful death,  if  sin  could  have  been  forgiven  without 
all  this,  by  a  hint,  a  nod,  a  word  saying,  'Thy 
sins  are  forgiven  thee,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved  ?  ' " 
Where  is  the  greatness  of  this  love  if  salvation 
could  have  been  secured  in  any  other  way?  If 
Grod  could  forgive  sin  without  any  satisfaction 
being  rendered  to  the  law,  why  all  the  suffering 
and  anguish  of  his  beloved  Son  ? 

But  what  do  the  Scriptures  teach  concerning 
the  work  of  Christ  and  the  object  of  his  mission 
into  this  world?  "He  shall  save  liis  people  from 
their  sins."  (Matthew  i.  21.)  'Not  from  sinning 
merely,  but  from  sin;  and  if  from  sin,  from  the 
evil  and  consequences  of  sin.  A  man  can  not  be 
saved  from  sin  and  then  punished  for  the  sins 
from  which  he  has  been  saved ;  nor  can  a  man  be 
punished  for  his  sins  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law, 
and  then  be  saved  from  them.  "  The  Son  of  man 
came  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many."  (Matt. 
XX.  28.)     For  how  many?  Paul  says,  "He  gave 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  103 

himself  a  ransom  for  all."  (I.  Timothy  ii.  6.) 
The  word  ransom  signifies  the  price  paid  for  the 
release  or  redemption  of  a  prisoner  or  captive. 
Dr.  Clarke,  in  his  comment  on  this  latter  text,  says, 
"  The  word  used  here,  and  applied  to  the  death  of 
Christ,  signifies  that  ransom  which  consists  in  the 
exchange  of  one  person  for  another,  or  the  re- 
demption of  life  by  life."  Christ  gave  his  life,  that 
others  through  him  and  by  him  might  have  eter- 
nal life. 

We  will  examine  another  class  of  scriptures. 
''  God  sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made 
under  the  law,  to  redeem  them  that  were  under 
the  law,  that  we  might  receive  the  adoption  of 
sons."  (Galatians  iv.  4,  5.)  How  did  Christ  re- 
deem them  that  were  under  the  law  ?  The  same 
apostle  tells  us,  in  Galatians  iii.  13.  "  Christ  hath 
redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being  made 
a  curse  for  us."  We  are  not  to  understand  from 
this  that  Christ  was  changed  into  a  curse,  but 
took  the  curse  of  the  law  upon  himself.  In  other 
w^ords,  he  was  "made  an  atonement  for  our  sins; 
for  whatever  was  offered  as  an  atonement  for  sin 
was  considered  as  bearing  the  punishment  due  to 
sin."  In  II.  Corinthians  v.  21  the  apostle  says, 
"  He  hath  made  him  to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no 
sin."  Christ  knew  no  sin,  for  he  was  "  without  spot, 
and  blameless."     He  was  pure  and  innocent.    Yet 


104  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

Paul  says  he  was  made  to  sin  for  us.  The  simple 
meaning  of  the  passage  is,  that  Christ  was  made 
a  sin-ofiering,  or  a  sacrifice  for  sin.  In  further 
proof  of  this,  I  will  quote  from  Isaiah  liii.  6.  "  All 
we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray;  we  have  turned 
every  one  to  his  own  way ;  and  the  Lord  hath  laid 
on  him  the  iniquity  of  us  all."  Also,  from  I.  Peter 
ii.  24,  "  "Who  his  own  self  bare  our  sins  in  his  own 
body  on  the  tree."  It  would  be  little  less  than  blas- 
phemy to  say  that  our  sins  were  imputed  to  him 
as  though  they  had  been  his  own.  How  then  did 
he  bear  our  sins  in  his  own  body?  He  met  the 
claims  of  the  law  in  our  stead,  and  thereby  ''  bare 
the  jpunishment  due  to  our  sins  J' 

It  would  be  exceedingly  difficult  to  understand 
the  meaning  of  the  foregoing  text  if  we  reject 
the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement.  How  could 
Christ  be  made  a  curse  for  us?  How  could  our 
sins  be  laid  on  him  ?  How  could  he  bear  our  sins 
in  his  own  body  on  the  tree  ?  How  could  he  be 
made  sin  for  us  unless  he  stood  in  our  stead  and 
became  our  surety?  And  if  he  stood  in  our  stead 
and  became  our  surety,  then  his  sufferings  were 
vicarious.  Look  again  at  the  language  used.  "  He 
gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all."  "  God  laid  on 
him  the  iniquity  of  us  all."  "  He  was  made  to  be 
sin  for  us."  "  He  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body 
on  the  tree."     "  He  was  made  a  curse  for  us."     If 


CAEErULLY   EXAMINED.  105 

the  words  employed  by  the  sacred  writers  in  these 
passages  do  not  establish  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement,  I  do  not  know  what  language  they 
could  have  used  to  establish  it.  And  if  they  did 
not  intend  to  teach  that  doctrine,  I  know  not  why 
they  should  have  employed  such  language. 

Now  if,  as  Universalists  teach,  the  sinner  must 
suffer  the  full  penalty  of  the  law,  if  he  can  not  by 
any  possibility  escape  this  punishment,  then  the 
suflerings  and  death  of  Christ  availed  nothing. 
Our  Lord  did  not  suffer  for  himself,  for  he  was 
pure  and  innocent.  He  was  the  Lamb  of  God; 
without  spot,  and  blameless.  For  whom,  then,  and 
for  what  end  did  he  suffer?  Paul  answers  this 
double  question,  "Who  gave  himself  for  us,  that 
he  might  redeem  us  from  all  iniquity."  "  He  gave 
himself  for  us."  He  ''tasted  death  for  every 
man."  "He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions; 
he  was  bruised  for  our  iniquities."  "He  was  de- 
livered for  our  offenses."  "  He  died  for  our  sins, 
according  to  the  Scriptures."  As  a  matter  of  sim- 
ple justice  the  sinner  could  not  have  suffered  more 
than  the  full  penalty  of  the  law,  if  Christ  had  not 
suffered  at  all.  So,  according  to  the  "Theology 
of  Universalism,"  the  sinner  is  in  no  conceivable 
way  benefited  by  the  sufferings  and  death  of 
Christ ;  he  must  suffer  the  punishment  due  to  sin 
all   the    same   as   if  Christ  had  not  come  at  all. 


106  UNIVERSAL  EESTORATION 

This  view  takes  away  the  corner-stone  of  our 
justification  by  faith ;  for  if  Christ  in  his  death 
did  not  render  satisfaction  to  the  law,  how  then 
can  God  he  just  and  justify  him  that  believeth  in 
Jesus?  On  what  grounds  are  sinners  justified?  Is 
it  on  account  of  their  own  sufi:ering,  or  through 
the  merits  of  Christ's  suffering?  If  we  say  it  is 
on  the  grounds  or  through  the  merits  of  their  own 
suflering,  then  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus 
Christ  availed  nothing,  and  every  man  becomes  his 
own  savior.  If  we  say  it  is  through  the  merits  of 
Christ's  suffering  and  death,  then  Universalism 
falls  to  the  ground.  Daniel,  when  speaking  con- 
cerning Christ,  said,  ''He  shall  be  cut  off*,  but 
not  for  himself. "  For  whom,  then  ?  Paul  said, 
^'Christ  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures." 
But  how  are  men  benefited  by  the  sacrifical 
offering  of  Jesus  Christ?  If  it  be  admitted  that 
the  Lord  Jesus  rendered  satisfaction  to  the  law  in 
man's  stead,  how  may  he  be  personally  benefited 
by  that  atonement?  To  this  inquiry  the  Script- 
ures furnish  a  most  satisfactory  answer.  "  There- 
fore by  the  deeds  of  the  law  there  shall  no  flesh  be 
justified  in  his  sight:  for  by  the  law  is  the  knowl- 
edge of  sin.  But  now  the  righteousness  of  God 
without  the  law  is  manifested,  being  witnessed  by 
the  law  and  the  prophets;  even  the  righteousness 
of  God  which  is  by  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  all 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  107 

and  upon  all  tliem  that  believe;  for  there  is  no 
difterence :  for  all  have  sinned,  and  come  short  of 
the  glory  of  God;  being  justified  freely  by  his 
grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus :  whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitia- 
tion through  faith  in  his  blood,  to  declare  his 
righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are 
past,  through  the  forbearance  of  God;  to  declare, 
I  say,  at  this  time  his  righteousness :  that  he  might 
be  just,  and  the  justifier  of  him  which  believeth  in 
Jesus."     (Romans  iii.  20-26.) 

In  these  verses  there  are  several  points  that  will 
demand  attention.  (1.)  "We  are  taught  clearly 
and  positively  that  no  man  is  or  can  be  justified 
by  the  deeds  of  the  law.  The  reason  assigned  by 
the  apostle  why  no  flesh  could  be  justified  by  the 
deeds  of  the  law  is,  that  "  hy  the  law  is  the  knowl- 
edge of  sin."  If  there  had  been  no  law  there  had 
been  no  sin.  It  is  by  the  law  that  we  know  what 
sin  is.  If,  therefore,  no  human  being  can  be  justi- 
fied by  obedience  to  the  law,  how  then  can  he  be 
justified  by  sufiering  the  penalties  of  the  law? 
(2.)  We  have  God's  method  of  saving  sinners. 
It  is  not  obedience  to  the  law.  It  is  not  sufierino^ 
the  penalties  of  the  law.  "What  then?  Is  it  the 
righteousness  of  God  w^ithout  the  law ;  that  is, 
"  without  any  right  or  claim  which  might  result 
from  obedience  to  the  law."     Ko  man   has  any 


108  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

right  to  claim  justification  as  a  reward  of  merit, 
which  might  result  either  from  obedience  to  the 
law,  or  suffering  its  penalty.  This  righteousness 
of  God  is  by  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  all,  and 
upon  all  that  believe.  (3.)  All  have  sinned.  All 
have  gone  out  of  the  way.  All  are  under  the 
sentence  of  the  law.  All  are  equally  helpless  and 
guilty.  InTo  man  has  in  his  own  hands  a  ransom 
for  his  soul.  (4.)  How  then,  or  upon  what 
grounds,  can  any  man  he  justified?  Paul  answers 
in  this  wise,  "  Justified  freely  by  his  grace,  through 
the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus."  But 
what  is  the  nature  of  this  redemption  through 
which  we  may  be  justified?  Paul,  in  Ephesians 
i.  7,  says,  "We  have  redemption  through  his 
blood,  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  according  to  the 
riches  of  his  grace."  It  is  evident  that  these 
scriptures,  taken  together,  mean  "  the  redemption 
of  the  soul  by  the  price  of  the  death  of  Christ." 
(5.)  By  the  words  redemptio7i  and  propitiation  the 
apostle  evidently  refers  to  the  vicarious  sufferings 
of  Jesus  Christ;  the  price  paid  down  for  the  re- 
demjotion  of  the  souls  of  men.  (6.)  The  apostle 
reaches  his  conclusion,  which  is  this,  that  the 
infinite  mercy  of  God, — his  righteousness, — made 
manifest  through  the  gospel,  is  to  this  eftect,  that 
God  can  now  be  "just,  and  the  justifier  of  him 
which  believeth  in  Jesus."     In  this  it  is  manifest 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  109 

"  that  God  designed  to  give  the  most  evident  dis- 
plays, both  oi  his  justice  and  ?nerc]/, — of  his  justice, 
in  requiring  a  sacrifice^  and  absolutely  refusing  to 
give  salvation  to  a  lost  world  in  any  other  way, 
and  of  his  mercy  in  providing  the  sacrifice  which 
his  justice  required.  Thus  because  Jesus  was  an 
atonement,  a  ransom  price  for  the  sin  of  the  world, 
therefore  God  can  consistently  with  his  justice 
pardon  every  soul  that  believetli  in  Jesus.""  But 
if  no  satisfaction  had  been  rendered  to  the  law, 
God  could  not  be  just  in  giving  salvation  to  any 
soul.  And  as  man,  poor,  sinful  man,  was  not  able 
to  make  satisfaction  to  the  law  for  his  sins,  God 
sent  his  own  Son,  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh, 
that  he,  by  the  grace  of  God,  should  taste  death 
for  every  man. 

Kow  if  the  sufterings  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ 
were  not  vicarious,  if  he  did  not  stand  in  our  stead, 
and  thereby  become  our  surety,  for  what  did  he 
suffer?  If  man  must  suffer  the  full  penalty  of  the 
laAV,  and  if,  as  Universalists  assert,  he  can  not  by 
any  possibility  escape  this  punishment,  in  what 
way  is  the  race  of  men  benefited  by  the  death  of 
Jesus  ?  Could  he  have  suffered  more  than  the  full 
penalty  of  the  law,  if  Christ  had  not  come  at  allY 
According  to  the  theory  of  Universalists,  how  are 
we  to  interpret  such  passages  as  these,  '*  God  so 
loved   the  world  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten 


110  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  should  not 
perish,  but  have  everlasting  life."  "But  we  see 
Jesus,  who  was  made  a  little  lower  than  the  angels 
for  the  suffering  of  death,  crowned  with  glory  and 
honor ;  that  he  by  the  grace  of  God  should  taste 
death  for  every  man."  "  Taste  death  for  every 
man.^^  All  had  sinned,  and  consequently  all  need- 
ed a  Savior.     Jesus  died  for  all. 

Can  any  amount  of  mere  human  suffering  satisfy 
the  claims  of  a  perfectly  righteous  law,  and  remove 
the  guilt  of  sin,  since  the  sufferer  is  himself  the 
guilty  party?  Can  an  imperfect  offering  satisfy 
the  claims  of  a  perfect  law  ?  The  doctrine  of  vica- 
rious atonement  rests  mainly  on  the  grounds  that 
Jesus  Christ  was  without  sin.  He  was  "without 
spot,  and  blameless."  .It  was  not  the  deity  in 
Christ  that  died,  but  the  manhood;  the  perfect 
man,  in  which  dwelt  all  the  fullness  of  the  Godhead 
bodily.  There  was  in  this  perfect  manhood  an 
intrinsic  value,  owing  in  part  to  the  fact  that  it 
was  without  sin,  but  more  especially  because  it 
was  sanctified  by  the  divine  nature  that  dwelt 
within.  The  gift  was  sanctified  by  the  altar*  Add 
to  this  the  fact  that  this  perfect  sacrifice  was  of- 
fered through  the  eternal  Spirit,  and  you  have  the 
whole  trinity  immediately  and  directly  connected 
with  the  sacrifical  offering  of  Jesus  Christ. 

In  order  to  understand  more  fully  and  clearly 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  Ill 

the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement,  it  will  be 
necessary  to  discriminate  between  atonement  and 
redemption.  These  terms  are  often  used  synony- 
mously, but  they  are  widely  different  in  significa- 
tion. They  sustain  to  each  other  the  relation  of 
cause  and  effect.  The  object  of  atonement  is  God, 
while  man  is  the  object  of  redemption.  In  other 
words,  atonement  is  a  sacrifice  oflered  to  God, 
while  redemption  is  a  benefit  conferred  upon  man. 
They  difler  also  in  design.  The  design  of  atone- 
ment is  to  make  God  propitious  toward  man;  to 
be  gracious  and  merciful,  ready  to  forgive  sins  and 
bestow  blessings.  God  never  could  be  gracious 
toward  man  and  bestow  blessings  upon  him  until 
satisfaction  was  rendered  to  the  law.  The  design 
of  redemption,  coming  to  us  as  the  effect  of  atone- 
ment, is  to  make  us  happy  and  blessed  forever. 
The  end  of  atonement  was  to  the  eftect  "that  God 
might  be  just,  and  justify  him  which  belie veth  in 
Jesus.''  Atonement  takes  effect  by  changing  the 
relations  of  God  toward  the  guilty,  while  redemp- 
tion takes  effect  by  changing  the  relation  of 
the  guilty  toward  God.  Hence,  if  there  had 
been  no  atonement  there  could  be  no  redemp- 
tion.  Christ  has  redeemed  us.  But  how?  By 
paying  a  certain  price.  What  was  that  price? 
Peter  shall  answer.  "■  Ye  were  not  redeemed  with 
corruptible  things,  as  silver  and  gold."    IIow  then? 


112  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

"  With  the  precious  blood  of  Christ,  as  of  a  lamb 
without  blemish  and  without  spot."  The  price 
then  was  ''  the  precious  blood  of  Christ.''  To  whom 
was  this  price  paid?  To  God.  "What  for?  To 
satisfy  the  claims  of  the  law.  If  this  price  had 
not  been  paid,  God  never  could  have  been  gracious 
to  a  lost  and  ruined  race. 

Universalists  have  a  great  deal  to  say  about  the 
ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men.  But 
on  what  grounds  do  they  plead  for  this?  They 
reject  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement,  and 
hence  must  reject  the  doctrine  of  redemption;  for 
if  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement  be  not  true 
there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  redemption,  no 
more  than  there  can  be  an  effect  without  a  cause. 
Without  wishing  to  speak  unkindly  of  any  who 
may  have  fallen  into  that  belief,  it  is  nevertheless 
true  that  the  "Theology  of  Universalism "  is  a 
Christless  theology.  How  do  they  expect  to  join 
with  the  blood-washed  host  that  will  stand  near 
the  throne  and  sing,  "  Unto  him  that  loved  us,  and 
ivashed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood,  and  hath 
made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God  and  his  Fa- 
ther; to  him  be  glory  and  dominion  forever  and 
ever.     Amen." 

In  the  course  of  this  argument  the  following 
points  have  been  considered  : 

1.     Jesus  Christ  came  into  the  world  to  save 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  113 

sinners  from  their  sins,  and  consequently  to  save 
them  from  the  punishment  due  to  sin.  By  the 
grace  of  God  he  tasted  death  for  every  man. 

2.  Jesus  Christ  being  made  under  the  law,  and 
being  made  a  curse  for  us,  thereby  stood  in  our 
stead  and  became  our  surety.  And  being  God, 
manifest  in  the  flesh,  he  was  able  to  render  satis- 
faction to  the  law,  so  that  God  can  now  be  just, 
and  justify  them  which  believe  in  Jesus. 

3.  That  if  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus 
Christ  were  not  vicarious,  if  he  did  not  render  sat- 
isfaction to  God,  so  that  the  penitent  believer  may 
be  deUvered  from  the  guilt  of  sin,  and  also  the 
punishment  due  to  sin,  then  the  human  family  has 
in  no  conceivable  way  been  benefited  by  the  death 
of  Christ.  If  Christ  had  not  come  at  all,  the  sin- 
ner could  not  in  justice  have  suffered  more  than 
the  penalty  of  the  law. 

4.  There  is  no  merit  in  human  suffering,  since 
the  sufferer  is  himself  the  guilty  party.  The  law 
is  perfect,  hence  nothing  but  a  perfect  sacrifice 
could  satisfy  its  claims. 

5.  That  the  terms  employed  by  the  sacred 
writers  to  denote  the  work  of  Christ  can  admit 
of  no  reasonable  interpretation,  if  the  doctrine  of 
vicarious  atonement  be  not  true, — such,  for  ex- 
ample, as  these :  "  The  Lord  hath  laid  on  him 
the  iniquity  of  us  all."     "He  came  to  save  his 

8 


114  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

people  from  their  sins."  "  He  gave  liimself  a  ran- 
som for  all."  "  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  from  the 
curse  of  the  law,  being  made  a  curse  for  us." 
"He  hath  made  him  to  he  sin  for  us."  ^^Who  his 
own  self  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the 
tree."  "He  tasted  death  for  every  man."  "He 
died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures." 
"  Redeemed  with  the  precious  blood  of  Christ." 
"By  whose  stripes  we  are  healed."  "He  was  cut 
off,  but  not  for  himself."  To  those  who  reject  the 
doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement,  these  scriptures 
must  be  unintelligible. 

6.  That  atonement  and  redemption  differ  in 
object,  design,  and  nature, — the  one  standing  as 
the  cause  and  the  other  as  the  effect.  If  the  doe- 
trine  of  vicarious  atonement  be  not  true,  there  can 
be  no  such  thing  as  redemption,  no  more  than 
tJiere  can  be  an  effect  without  a  cause ;  therefore 
Universalism,  by  rejecting  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement,  promises  eternal  salvation  to  the  whole 
race  of  man  without  atonement  or  redemption. 

7.  That  a  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement  removes  the  only  grounds  upon  which 
God  can  be  just  and  justify  them  which  believe  in 
Jesus. 

In  the  work  of  atonement,  by  which  satisfaction 
was  rendered  to  the  law,  no  injustice  is  done  to 
any  person  or  thing.     No  injury  is  done  to  Christ, 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  115 

for  he  laid  down  his  life.  It  was  voluntary  upon 
his  part.  "  I  have,"  said  he,  "  power  to  lay  it  (my 
life)  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it."  ^'He 
gave  himself  for  us.'^  'No  injustice  is  done  to  God 
by  the  substitution  of  Christ.  He  was  God's 
beloved  Son,  in  whom  he  was  well  pleased.  No 
injustice  was  done  to  the  law.  Indeed  the  law  was 
magnified,  and  made  honorable  by  the  substitution 
of  Christ, — "  more  honorable  by  his  obedience  to 
it,  than  by  the  obedience  of  the  saints  and  angels 
in  heaven,"  and  vastly  more  honorable  than 
it  could  have  been  made  if  the  whole  human  race 
had  been  offered  as  a  sacrifice.  As  it  is,  God  is 
honored,  the  law  magnified,  and  Jesus  has  become 
the  author  of  eternal  salvation. 


116  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 


CHAPTEK  VIII. 

PARDON,    REMISSION,    JUSTIFICATION. 

In  the  two  preceding  chapters  I  showed,  from 
Universalist  authors  themselves,  that  they  deny  the 
divmity  or  deity  of  Christ,  and  hence  also  reject 
the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement.  In  this  ar- 
gument it  is  proposed  to  show  that  a  denial  and 
rejection  of  those  fundamental  doctrines  necessa- 
rily involve  a  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  pardon 
or  justification  hy  faith.  If  Christ  were  not  divine, 
if  he  were  not  "  God  manifest  in  the  flesh,"  he 
could  not  by  a  thousand  deaths  render  satisfaction 
to  the  law ;  and  if  satisfaction  were  not  rendered 
to  the  law,  it  were  impossible  for  God  to  he  just 
and  pardon  the  guilty.  So  it  must  be  apparent  to 
all  that  a  rejection  of  one  of  these  fundamental 
doctrines  involves  the  rejection  of  all  three.  In 
the  preceding  chapter  it  was  stated  that  Universal- 
ism  promised  eternal  salvation  to  the  whole  race 
of  man  without  either  atonement  or  redemption; 
and  now  it  is  proper  to  state  that  it  promises 
eternal  life  to  all  without  atonement,  redemption, 
or  justification  by  faith. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  117 

It  is  no  part  of  my  purpose  in  the  slightest 
degree  to  misrepresent  the  theology  of  Univer- 
salism.  I  shall  state  it  fairly  and  fully,  and  then 
test  it  by  the  word  of  God.  Rev.  Paul  Dean,  of 
Boston,  a  noted  Universal  Restorationist,  in  an 
article  prepared  by  himself,  and  published  in  the 
Encyclopedia  of  Religious  Knowledge,  says,  "The 
diiference  between  Restorationists  and  Universal- 
ists  relates  principally  to  the  subject  of  a  future 
retribution.  Universalists  believe  that  a  full  and 
perfect  retribution  takes  place  in  this  world,  while 
Restorationists  maintain  that  a  just  retribution 
does  not  take  place  in  time,  but  will  be  continued 
in  the  world  to  come."  The  author  of  the  ''  Ex- 
position  of  Universalism,'^  page  15,  says,  "  Set  it 
down  as  one  of  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  Univer- 
salism,  that  no  man  can,  by  any  possibility,  escape 
a  just  punishment  for  sin."  Mr.  A.  C.  Thomas  in 
his  controversy  with  Mr.  Eby,  page  25,  says,  "I 
believe  that  God  will  render  to  every  man  accord- 
ing to  his  deeds, — that  is,  according  to  his  own 
deeds, —  consequently  I  reject  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement."  Mr.  Thayer  in  his  "  Theology  of 
Universalism,"  page  317,  says,  ''I^o  repentance  can 
save  from  the  just  penalty  of  the  violated  law." 
On  page  316  he  says,  "  The  sin  is  punished  and  for- 
given-, the  penalty  of  transgression  is  inflicted,  and 
then  the  sinner  is  forgiven;"  and  on  page  302  he 


118  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

says,  "The   present   is  a  state  of  retribution,  and 
not  of  probation." 

This,  then,  is  Universalism  fairly  stated,  which 
I  shall  show,  in  the  course  of  this  argument,  flatly 
and  positively  contradicts  the  word  of  God.  If 
men  suffer  all  that  is  justly  due  them  on  account 
of  their  sins,  if  they  are  fully  punished  for  all 
their  sins,  as  all  these  authors  claim,  then  there  is 
nothing  to  be  forgiven.  If  you  owe  a  man  one 
hundred  pounds  and  pay  him  the  last  farthing,  it 
would  be  an  insult  to  common  sense  for  him  then 
to  say,  I  forgive  you  that  bebt.  If  a  man  commits 
murder  and  is  hanged  by  the  neck  till  he  is  dead, 
the  governor  would  not  have  much  to  pardon  ;  so 
if  a  sinner  suffers  the  extreme  penalty  of  the  law 
there  is  nothing  to  forgive.  But  this  is  Univer- 
salism. You  will  remember  that  the  author  of 
the  "  Exposition  of  Universalism"  says,  "  Set  it 
down  as  one  of  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  Univer- 
salism, that  no  man  can,  by  any  possibility,  escape 
a  just  punishment  for  sin."  And  Mr.  Thayer 
says,  "  No  repentance  can  save  from  the  just  pen- 
alty of  the  violated  law."  A  man  may  repent  and 
believe  with  all  his  heart,  but  he  can  not,  by  any 
possibility,  "escape  a  just  punishment  for  sin." 
Jesus  "  died  for  our  sins,  according  to  the  Script- 
ures." "He  tasted  death  for  every  man."  "The 
iniquity  of  us  all  was  laid  upon  him."     "  He  bare 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  119 

our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree."  "  He  gave 
himself  a  ransom  for  all."  But  no  matter  for  all 
this,  the  ^^ peculiar  doctrine^'  of  Universalism  is 
"that  no  man  can  escape  a  just  punishment  for 
sin."  No  rej^entaiice,  hoivever  sincere,  can  save  from 
the  just  fenalty  of  the  violated  law. 

How  utterly  unreasonable  is  the  theology  of 
Universalism.  Let  us  calmly  consider  it  in  the 
light  of  reason  and  revelation.  The  law  of  God  is 
perfect,  and  demands  perfect  obedience  from  first 
to  last.  How  can  an  imperfect  and  sinful  creature 
render  perfect  satisfaction  to  a  perfect  law?  If  it 
were  possible  for  man  by  suffering  to  meet  and 
satisfy  the  claims  of  the  law,  there  was  no  neces- 
sity for  Christ's  coming  into  the  world  to  suffer 
and  die.  But  suppose  it  were  possible  for  a  sinner 
at  the  age  of  thirty  or  forty  years  to  commence  to 
render  perfect  obedience  to  the  law.  That  is  just 
what  the  law  demands.  But  how  can  he  render 
this  perfect  obedience  to  the  law,  which  would 
necessarily  require  all  his  time  and  power,  and  at 
the  same  time  render  satisfaction  to  the  law  for 
past  offenses  ?  What  does  the  law  demand  ?  Jesus 
said,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all 
thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy 
mind ;  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.  On  these  two 
commandments  hang  all  the  law  and  the  prophets." 
To  render  perfect  obedience  to  the  law,  such  as  is 


120  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

required  in  these  passages,  will  require  the  whole 
time,  and  all  the  powers  of  the  heart,  mind,  and 
soul.  Can  a  sinner  do  this?  He  cannot.  Why? 
Paul  says  "the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against 
God;  it  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither 
indeed  can  he."  It  is  therefore  impossible  for  a 
sinner  to  render  perfect  obedience  to  the  law  of 
God.  But  even  if  this  were  possible,  it  is  not  pos- 
sible for  him  to  do  more  than  meet  the  present 
claims- of  the  law, — he  can  not  do  more  than  to  love 
God  with  all  the  heart,  mind,  and  soul.  How  then 
is  it  possible  for  him  to  meet  the  present  claims  of 
the  law,  and  at  the  same  time  render  satisfaction 
to  the  law  for  past  offenses?  It  will  be  pertinent 
to  the  argument  in  this  connection  to  state  that 
a  sinner  can  not  receive  the  punishment  due  to  sin 
until  a  space  of  time  shall  have  elapsed  after  he  has 
ceased  to  sin;  and  he  can  not  cease  to  sin  as  long  as 
he  is  under  condemnation;  for  the  carnal  mind  is  not 
and  can  not  be  subject  to  the  law  of  God.  If  the 
sinner  is  punished  to-day  for  the  sins  of  yesterday, 
he  must  be  punished  to-morrow  for  the  sins  of  to- 
day; for  while  he  is  suffering  for  past  sins  he 
can  not  render  perfect  obedience  to  the  law.  'No 
man  can  do  more  than  meet  the  claims  of  the  law 
each  moment,  which  will  require  the  combined 
action  of  his  heart,  mind,  and  soul.  If  a  man 
when  he  comes  to  the  line  of  accountability  would 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  121 

commence  at  that  moment  to  love  God  with  all  his 
power,  and  never  in  thought,  word,  or  deed  com- 
mit an  oftense,  that  is  just  what  the  law  requires 
— nothing  more  and  nothing  less.  But  here  is  a 
man  who  has  violated  the  law  a  thousand  times. 
Suppose  he  should  commence  to -love  God  with  all 
hib  power ;  how  is  he  to  render  satisfaction  to  the 
law  for  past  offenses  ?  The  present  claim  of  the 
law  is  perfect  obedience.  How  then  can  any  man 
meet  this  claim  while  he  is  rendering  satisfaction 
to  the  law  for  past  offenses?  It  is  utterly  impos- 
sible. There  is  but  one  hope  for  a  lost  and  ruined 
world,  and  that  hope  is  in  God  through  the  vica- 
rious sufferings  of  Jesus  Christ.  God  can  now  be 
just,  and  justify  all  that  believe  in  Jesus. 

Before  entering  directly  upon  the  scripture  ar^ 
gument,  I  will  give  the  meaning  of  the  word 
translated  i^avdon  and  remission.  The  word  is 
aphesis.  Donnegan  defines  it,  "remission  of  a 
debt,  penalty,  or  punishment."  Schrivellius  de- 
fines it,  "  remission  of  something  due,  as  of  a  fault 
or  punishment."  Bretschneider  defines  it,  "  re- 
mission of  that  which  another  owes  me,  as  of 
debt  or  tribute."  Graves,  Greenfield,  and  Robin- 
son give  the  word  substantially  the  same  defini- 
tion. Webster  and  Johnson  define  the  word 
forgive,  "to  pardon,  not  to  punish."  All  these 
lexicons,  which  are  reckoned  among  the  best  in  the 


122  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

world,  agree  that  the  word  aphesis,  translated  for- 
giveness, jjardon,  remission,  means  remission  of  a 
penalty  due  to  sin.  I^ow  the  first  question  that 
naturally  suggests  itself  is  this,  What  could  have 
induced  the  sacred  writers  to  employ  words  and 
terms  that  meant  one  thing  when  they  intended 
to  teach  something  very  different?  If  the  word 
used  by  them,  and  translated  forgiveness,  pardon, 
remission,  was  not  intended  to  convey  the  natural 
and  proper  meaning  of  these  words,  why  did  they 
not  employ  such  words  as  would  express  their 
meaning?  But  Universalist  authors  insist  that  no 
man  can  escape  a  just  punishment  for  his  sins. 
The  sin  is  first  punished,  and  then  forgiven.  No 
repentance  can  save  from  the  punishment  due  to 
.sin.  And  yet  the  word  used  by  the  sacred  writers 
means  precisely  what  they  (Universalists)  say  it 
does  not  mean.  But  Universalist  authors  are  com- 
pelled to  take  this  strange  and  unreasonable 
position ;  for  having  denied  the  deity  of  Christ, 
and  hence  also  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atone- 
ment, they  must  of  necessity  deny  the  doctrine 
of  pardon  as  held  and  taught  by  evangelical 
churches. 

But  we  will  enter  upon  an  examination  of  a  few 
of  the  many  passages  that  teach  the  doctrine  of 
pardon,  or  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  "  Therefore 
being  justified   by  faith   [not  suffering],    we  have 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  123 

peace  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 
(Romans  v.  1.)  "Being  justified  freely  by  his 
grace  [not  by  suffering]  through  the  redemption 
that  is  in  Christ  Jesus."  (Rom.  iii.  24.)  "  Who 
was  delivered  for  our  offenses,  and  was  raised 
again  for  our  justification."  (Rom.  iv.  25.)  Justi- 
fication, in  an  evangelical  sense,  is  an  act  of  God's 
free  grace  whereby  he  pardoneth  all  our  sins.  It  is 
a  work  done  for  us,  whereby  we  are  accepted  as 
righteous  through  the  merits  of  Christ.  If  any 
man  could  be  found  that  never  sinned,  he  might 
be  justified  by  the  law  in  a  legal  sense.  But  as  all 
have  sinned  and  gone  out  of  the  way,  and  are 
under  the  condemnation  of  the  law,  they  must  be 
restored,  if  restored  at  all,  through  the  righteous- 
ness of  another.  Hence,  to  meet  this  case,  Paul 
declares  that  Christ  "  was  delivered  for  our  offenses, 
and  raised  again  for  our  justification."  ""We  are 
justified  freely  by  his  grace,  through  the  redemp- 
tion that  is  in  Christ  Jesus."  So,  then,  "  God  can 
now  be  just,  and  the  justifier  of  them  which  be- 
lieve in  Jesus."  If  to  be  justified  does  not  mean 
to  be  delivered  from  the  punishment  due  to  sin, 
what  then  does  the  apostle  mean  by  the  use  of 
that  word,  and  especially  in  the  connection  in 
which  he  uses  it? 

But  we  will  take  another  class  of  texts,  which 
speak  of  pardon  and  remission.    Let  it  be  observed 


124         UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

that  we  are  dealing  strictly  with  scripture  terms, 
such  as  were  employed  by  the  writers  of  the  Old 
and  'New  Testaments — men  who  spake  as  they  ivere 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  "Let  the  wicked  for- 
sake his  way,  and  the  unrighteous  man  his 
thoughts :  and  let  him  return  unto  the  Lord,  and 
he  will  have  mercy  upon  him ;  and  to  our  God, 
for  he  ivill  abundantly  pardon.^^  (Isaiah  Iv.  7.) 
Mercy  and  pardon  are  promised  to  all  that  will 
return  unto  the  Lord.  Instead  of  being  threatened 
with  punishment  for  their  wickedness,  they  are 
promised  abundant  pardon.  The  condition  upon 
which  this  abundant  pardon  rests  is,  that  the 
wicked  should  forsake  his  ivay,  and  return  unto  the 
Lord.  "And  that  repentance  and  remission  of 
sins  should  be  preached  in  his  name  among  all  na- 
tions, beginning  at  Jerusalem."  (Luke  xxiv.  47.) 
But  Mr.  Thayer  says  that  "  no  repentance  can  se- 
cure us  against  the  punishment  due  to  sin."  Why 
then  were  the  apostles  commanded  to  preach  it? 
Why  connect,  in  one  sentence,  repentance  and  re- 
mission of  sins?  Of  what  were  the  people  to 
repent?  And  in  what  way  would  they  be  bene- 
fited by  their  repentance  ?  If  no  man  can  escape 
a  just  punishment  for  all  his  sins,  what  remains  to 
be  remitted  after  the  sinner  shall  have  suffered  the 
full  penalty  of  the  law  ?  Yet  Jesus  said  to  his 
disciples,  Go  and  preach  the  doctrine  of  repent- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  125 

ance  and  the  remission  of  sins ;  preach  it  in  my 
name  ;  preach  it  among  all  nations.  But  if  Uni- 
versaliam  be  true  there  is  nothing  in  it.  Every 
man  must  be  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law,  whether  he  repents  or  not;  then  after  he 
shall  have  suffered  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law  for 
every  sin  he  has  committed,  he  shall  be  pardoned. 
Pardoned  of  what? 

I  will  now  invite  special  attention  to  a  very  im- 
portant text.  "  To  him  give  all  the  prophets  wit- 
ness, that  through  his  name  whosoever  believeth 
in  him  shall  receive  remission  of  sins."  (Acts  x.  43.) 
It  may  be  proper  to  state  in  this  connection  that 
repentance  and  faith  mutually  imply  each  other. 
There  can  be  no  such  thing  as  evangelical  repent- 
ance without  faith ;  for  "he  that  cometh  to  God 
must  believe  that  he  is,  and  that  he  is  a  rewarder 
of  them  that  diligently  seek  him."  And  there  can 
be  no  such  thing  as  saving  or  justifying  faith 
without  repentance.  "Repentance  toward  God, 
and  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  is  the 
gospel  plan  for  securing  the  remission  of  sins. 
In  the  text  above  quoted  Peter  declares  that 
"  whosoever  believeth  in  him  [Christ]  shall  receive 
remission  of  sins."  "The  phrase"  (remission  of 
sins),  says  Dr.  Clarke,  "  means  simply  the  taking 
away  of  sins ;  and  this  does  not  refer  to  the  guilt 
of  sin  merely,  but  also  to  its  poweVy  nature,  and 


126  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

consequences."  If  the  ^^  remission  of  sins"  does 
not  imply  the  taking  away  of  the  guilt  and  conse- 
quences of  sin,  what  does  it  imply?  All  the  lexi- 
cons, Greek  and  English,  so  define  the  word  ajph- 
esis,  which  is  the  word  here  used  by  Peter,  and 
translated  "  remission^' 

In  Ephesians  i.  7,  Paul  when  speaking  of  Christ 
says,  "  In  whom  we  have  redemption  through  his 
blood,  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  according  to  the 
riches  of  his  grace,"  Add  to  this  a  parallel  pas- 
sage in  Colossians  i.  14,  ''In  whom  we  have  re- 
demption through  his  blood,  even  the  forgiveness 
of  sins."  In  these  passages  it  is  declared  that  we 
have  redemption  through  the  blood  of  Christ; 
that  is,  the  blood  of  Christ  was  the  redemption 
price  paid  down,  which  satisfied  the  claims  of  the 
law.  Without  the  shedding  of  blood  there  would 
have  been  no  redemption  nor  remission  of  sins. 
If  Universalism  be  true  we  have  no  redemption, 
and  consequently  no  forgiveness  of  sins.  A  re- 
jection of  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement 
necessarily  involves  a  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of 
redemption,  and  the  rejection  of  these  two  funda- 
mental doctrines  precludes  the  possibility  of  any 
man  receiving  pardon  or  the  remission  of  sins. 
But  this  is  Universalism,  as  held  and  taught  by 
its  authors.  No  ato7iement,  no  redemption,  and  no 
remission  of  sins.    And  yet  they  affirm  that  the 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  127 

Scriptures  teach  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salva- 
tion of  all  men. 

Next  we  will  examine  Psalms  ciii.  10-12,  "He 
hath  not  dealt  with  us  after  our  sins ;  nor  rewarded 
us  according  to  our  iniquities.     For  as  the  heaven 
is   high   above    the    earth,  so  great  is  his  mercy 
toward  tlieni  that  fear  him.     As  far  as  the  east  is 
from  the  west,  so  far  hath  he  removed  our  trans- 
gressions  from   us."     Two   things   are   distinctly 
taught  in  these  verses.     (1.)     That  God  did  not 
apportion  their  punishment  to  their  sins.     He  did 
not   reward   them    according   to   their   iniquities. 
But  Universalists  afiirm  that  God  does  apportion 
their  punishment  to  their  sins.     ''  Set  it  down," 
says  the  author  of  the  "Exposition  of  Universal-  . 
ism,"  "  as  one  of  the  -peculiar  doctrines  of  Univers- 
alism,  that  no  man  can^  by  any  possibility,  escape  a 
just  punishment  for  his  sinsJ'     But  the  psalmist 
says  they  did  escape  this  punishment;  that  God 
did  not  reward  them  according  to  their  iniquities. 
Here  Universalism  flatly  contradicts  the  word  of 
God.     (2.)     The  psalmist  assigns  the  reason  why 
they  were  not  rewarded  according  to  their  iniqui- 
ties.    "  As  far  as  the  east  is  from  the  west,  so  far 
hath   he   removed   our    transgressions   from   us." 
But  how  were  their  transgressions  removed  ?     By 
punishment?     Certainly  not,  for  that  would  have 
been  rewarding  them  according  to  their  iniquities, 


128  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

which  the  psalmist  declares  the  Lord  did 
not  do.  How  then  were  their  transgressions  re- 
moved? There  was  no  way  hut  by  a  free  and  full 
pardon. 

We  will  compare  Universalism  with  a  few  more 
passages,  to  show  how  directly  it  contradicts  the 
word  of  God.  Mr.  Thayer  says,  page  315,  "  We 
a7^e  punished  for  sins  already  committed^  In 
Romans  iii.  25,  Paul  says,  "Whom  God  hath  set 
forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his 
blood,  to  declare  his  righteousness  for  the  remission 
of  sins  that  are  past,  through  the  forbearance  of 
God."  Mr.  Thayer  says  we  are  punished  for  sins 
already  committed,  and  Paul  says  that  through 
faith  in  the  blood  of  Jesus  we  receive  the  remission 
of  sins  that  are  past.  Whom  shall  we  believe, 
Paul  or  Mr.  Thayer  ?  They  can  not  both  be  right 
To  strengthen  the  language  of  Paul, — if  indeed 
it  needs  any  strengthening, — 1  will  add  the  testi- 
mony of  other  witnesses.  "He  is  faithful  and  just 
to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all 
unrighteousness."  (I.  John,  i.  9.)  "Blessed  is  he 
whose  transgression  is  forgiven,  whose  sin  is  cov- 
ered." (Psalms  xxxii.  1.)  "But  thou  art  a  God 
ready  to  pardon,  gracious  and  merciful,  slow  to 
anger,  and  of  great  kindness."  (Kehemiah  ix.  17.) 
"  And  be  ye  kind  one  to  another,  tender-hearted, 
forgiving  one  another^  even  as  God  for  Christ's  sake 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  129 

hath  forgiven  you."  (Ephesians  iv.  32.)  How- 
does  God  for  Christ's  sake  forgive  us  ?  Mr.  Thayer 
says,  page  316,  *'  The  sin  is  punished  and  forgiven. 
The  penalty  of  transgression  is  inflicted,  and  then 
the  sinner  is  forgiven."  And  we  are  to  forgive, 
one  another,  as  God  for  Christ's  sake  forgives  us; 
that  is,  if  any  person  offends  us  or  does  us  harm, 
we  must  first  punish  him  all  the  law  will  allow, 
after  w^hich  we  can  forgive.  This  is  Universalism. 
This  is  their  theology. 

If  men  are  punished  for  their  sins  before  thej 
are  or  can  he  forgiven,  then  no  man  can  come  to 
Christ  until  after  he  has  been  fully  punished  for 
all  his  past  sins.  But  some  men  continue  to  sin  to 
the  very  end  of  life — die  in  a  drunken  stupor ;  die 
blaspheming  the  name  of  God ;  die  infidels.  When 
will  they  come  to  Christ?  Do  the  Scriptures  teach 
that  any  man  will  repent  and  come  to  Christ  after 
death?  I  now  afiirm  that  there  is  not  a  single 
passage  of  scripture  in  God's  word  which  teaches 
that  any  man  will  come  to  Christ  after  death ;  and 
I  further  affirm  that  there  is  not  a  single  passage 
in  the  Bible  that  teaches  that  any  man  will  be 
pardoned  after  this  life.  What  then  will  become 
of  those  who  live  and  die  in  sin?  Mr.  Thayer,  on 
page  205,  admits  "  that  thousands  die  in  ignorance, 
unbelief,  and  sin,"  and  yet  affirms  that  all  will 
ultimately  be  holy  and  happy.    But  he  has  not  a 


130  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

single  passage  to  sustain  him  in  the  belief  that  any 
will  come  to  Christ  after  death. 

In  this  argument  the  following  points  have  been 
considered : 

1.  That  Universalists — according  to  their  own 
authors — deny  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement; 
hence,  also,  the  do.ctrine  of  redemption  and  the 
pardon  and  forgiveness  of  sins  that  are  past.  A 
denial  or  rejection  of  any  one  of  these  doctrines 
involves  the  rejection  of  all;  hence  Universalism 
rejects  atonement,  redemption,  and  the  forgiveness 
of  sins. 

2.  It  has  been  shown  that  it  is  utterly  impossi- 
ble for  a  sinner  to  reach  the  end  of  punishment 
for  sin ;  that  no  one,  by  any  possibility,  can  meet 
the  present  claims  of  the  law,  and  at  the  same  time 
render  satisfaction  for  past  offenses.  The  present 
claims  of  the  law  are  such  as  to  require  the  com- 
bined exercise  of  the  whole  heart,  mind,  and  soul. 
The  past  claims  of  the  law  were  exactly  the  same, 
so  that  no  man  can  meet  the  past  and  present 
claims  of  the  law  at  the  same  time. 

3.  It  has  been  shown,  from  numerous  passages 
of  scripture,  that  justification  by  faith — the  pardon 
and  remission  of  sins  through  the  merits  of  Christ 
— is  the  uniform  doctrine  of  the  Bible. 

4.  It  has  been  proved  by  the  very  best  lexicons 
— Greek  and  English — that  the    word  translated 


CAEEFULLY  EXAMINED.  131 

pal-don,  remission,  and  forgiveness j  means  the  re- 
mission or  pardon  of  the  penalty  due  to  sin ;  and 
hence,  that  the  notion  that  a  man  mn^t  suffer  the 
full  penalty  of  the  law  before  he  can  be  pardoned^ 
is  not  only  not  true,  but  can  not  possibly  be  true* 

5.  That  without  the  shedding  of  blood  there 
could  be  no  redemption ;  and  if  there  were  no  re- 
demption there  could  be  no  forgiveness  of  sins, 
either  past  oi*  present. 

6.  That  a  sinner  can  not,  by  suffering,  meet 
and  satisfy  the  claims  of  a  perfect  law,  seeing  that 
he  is  under  its  condemnation.  I*To thing  but  a  per- 
fect sacrifice  could,  by  any  possibility,  meet  the 
claims  of  a  perfect  law. 

7.  That  simiers  can  be  delivered  from  the  guilt 
and  punishment  due  to  sin  by  paMon,  and  by  par^ 
don  only. 

8.  That  God  does  not  apportion  punishment 
according  to  the  number  and  magnitude  of  sins 
committed,  but  if  the  wicked  will  forsake  his  way 
and  turn  to  the  Lord  he  will  have  mercy  upon 
him  and  abundantly  pardon. 

9.  It  has  been  shown  that  sinners  can  not  re- 
ceive the  punishment  due  for  past  sins  until  a 
space  of  time  shall  have  elapsed  after  they  shall 
have  ceased  to  commit  sin ;  and  they  can  not  cease 
to  commit  sin  as  long  as  they  are  under  the  con- 
demnation of  the' law;  and  they  can  not  be  deliv- 


132  UNIVflRSAL    HESTOIUTION 

ered  from  this  condemnation  only  as  they  are  re* 
ceived  into  Christ  Jesus  (Romans  viii.  1) ;  and 
they  can  not  enter  into  Christ  Jesus  until  they  are 
new  creatures  (I.  Corinthians,  v.  17) ;  and  they 
can  not  be  made  new  creatures  until  the  claims  of 
the  law  are  fully  met.  Kow  as  iTniversalists  reject 
the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement,  which  is  the 
only  conceivable  way  by  which  the  claims  of  the 
taw  could  be  satisfied,  and  as  by  the  rejection  of 
this  doctrine  they  set  aside  the  doctrine  of  redemp- 
tion and  the  forgiveness  of  sins;  therefore,  ac- 
cording to  iJniversalism,  no  man  ever  will  or  can 
be  saved* 
10.  It  has  been  shown  that  the  Scriptures  no- 
vvhere  Warrant  us  in  the  belief  that  any  man  will 
or  can  conie  to  Christ  after  death;  and  as  Mr. 
Thayer  admits  that  "thousands  die  in  ignorance, 
Unbelief,  and  sin;-"  therefore  all  who  die  in  sin 
will  never  be  saved. 

I  will  close  this  chapter  in  the  language  of  one 
who  for  a  number  of  years  was  a  Universalist 
preacher.  "  Universalism  talks  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  but  denies  the  atonement.  It  declares  that 
Jesus  tasted  death  for  all;  yet  it  affirms  most 
boldly  that  Christ  does  nothing  for  men  that  they 
can  not  do  for  themselves.  ^  ^  *  It  teaches 
that  life  is  not  a  probation  ;  that  no  act  of  man  can 
aflect  in  the  least  his  future  condition ;  that  all  will 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.       ,  133 

be  upon  an  equality  in  the  next  world,  all  start  from 
the  grave  upon  the  same  level,  however  they  may 
have  lived  or  died;  that  secret  prayer  is  not  a 
duty  enjoined  by  its  creed;  that  the  Sabbath  is  an 
institution  of  expediency,  and  not  of  divine  ap- 
pointment, and  that  all  are  hastening  to  the  grave, 
and  to  a  world  beyond,  in  which  no  diiference  will 
be  made  between  the  evil  and  the  good,  '  between 
him  that  serveth  God  and  him  that  serveth  him 
not.'  The  doctrine  peculiar  to  Universalism  is 
this :  a  gospel  not  essential  to  salvation ;  a  death 
for  sinners  with  no  redemption — no  atonement  in 
it;  a  denial  of  depravity,  regeneration,  and  a  life 
of  holiness."  All  this  I  have  shown,  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapters,  to  be  the  peculiar  doctrine  of 
Universalism. 


134  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  IX. 

LIFE  A  PROBATION — MAN  A  MORAL  AGENT — THE  FUTURE 
STATE  CONDITIONAL. 

In  this  chapter  it  is  proposed  to  show  that  this 
is  a  life  of  probation,  that  man  is  a  moral  agent, 
and  that  the  future  state  of  happiness  is  suspended 
upon  conditions  to  be  complied  with  in  this  life. 
All  of  this  Universalists  deny.  Mr.  Thayer,  in  his 
"Theology  of  TJniversalism,"  page  302,  says, 
"  The  present  is  a  state  of  retribution  and  not  of 
probation."  On  page  304  he  says,  "  This  is  not  a 
state  of  probation  but  of  retribution,  and  the  pen- 
alty due  to  sin  is  inflicted  here."  On  page  275  he 
says,  "  The  thing  done  is  its  own  reward,  there  is 
no  other,  and  properly  and  logically  there  can  be  no 
other J^  Mr.  George  Rogers,  author  of  the  "Pro 
and  Con  of  Universalism,"  page  300,  says,  "Believe 
me,  reader,  it  is  not  possible  to  avoid  the  conclu- 
sion that  all  things  take  place  agreeably  to  the 
unalterable  decree  of  Jehovali."  On  page  290  he 
says,  "You  must  see,  reader,  that  the  notion  of  a 
free  will  is  a  chimera.'''' 

Prom  these  extracts,  and  others  of  like  character 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  135 

which  might  be  given,  it  is  perfectly  clear  that 
TJniversalists  deny  the  moral  agency  of  man.  They 
deny  that  this  life  is  a  state  of  probation,  and 
hence,  also,  that  the  future  life  in  any  way  depends 
upon  his  acts  in  this  life.  Mr.  Thayer,  page  274, 
says,  "The  thing  done,  the  thought  we  cherish, 
what  we  are  in  ourselves ;  that  is,  our  reward  or  our 
punishment,  our  heaven  or  our  hell."  Every  man 
then  is  fully  rewarded  or  punished  for  all  he  does 
This  must  be  true  if  this  is  a  state  of  retribution ; 
and  Universalists  affirm  that  it  is.  How  they  can 
make  this  harmonize  with  that  other  notion,  "  that 
thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin,"  I 
know  not.  It  would  seem  that  if  this  were  a  state 
of  retribution,  if  every  man  found  his  heaven  or 
hell  in  what  he  does  here,  all  would  die  saints. 
But  they  say  not.  I  will  leave  them  to  harmonize 
their  own  theology.  They  affirm  th^^t  in  some 
way  or  other  all  men  will  be  made  holy  and 
happy.  The  infidel,  who  takes  pleasure  in  his 
lies,  the  drunkard,  the  thief,  the  murderer,  and 
the  miser  will  be  just  as  well  off  in  the  end  as  the 
most  pious.  Paul  gives  a  list  of  saints,  some  of 
whom  were  tortured,  others  had  trials  of  cruel 
mocking,  some  were  stoned,  and  others  were  sawn 
asunder.  All  this  they  endured  by  faith,  in  hope 
of  a  better  resurrection;  but  in  the  end  they  will 
be  no  better  ofl"  than  those  who  tortured  and  put 


136  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

them  to  death,  for,  according  to  Universalism, 
every  man  finds  his  heaven  or  hell  in  what  he  does 
here.  This  is  a  state  of  retribution  and  not  of 
prohation. 

I  shall  now  proceed  with  the  argument,  which 
is  to  prove,  from  the  word  of  God,  that  the  future 
and  eternal  salvation  of  the  soul  is  suspended  upon 
conditions  to  be  complied  with  in  this  life.  In 
proving  this  doctrine  it  will  also  be  established 
that  this  life  is  probational,  and  that  man  is  a 
moral  agent.  In  the  first  place,  I  wish  to  call 
special  attention  to  the  scriptural  rule  by  which 
we  are  to  be  governed  in  interpreting  all  the 
promises  and  threatenings  in  the  Bible.  ♦"At 
what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning  a  nation, 
and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  pluck  it  up,  and  to 
pull  down,  and  to  destroy  it;  if  that  nation,  against 
whom  I  ^have  pronounced,  turn  from  their  evil,  I 
will  repent  of  the  evil  that  I  thought  to  do  unto 
them.  And  at  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concern- 
ing a  nation,  and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  build 
and  to  plant  it ;  if  it  do  evil  in  my  sight,  that  it 
obey  not  my  voice,  then  I  will  repent  of  the  good, 
wherewith  I  said  I  would  benefit  them."  (Jere- 
miah xviii.  7-10.)  "But  if  the  wicked  will  turn 
from  all  his  sins  that  he  hath  committed,  and  keep 
all  my  statutes,  and  do  that  which  is  lawful  and 
right,  he  shall  surely  live,  he  shall  not  die.    All 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  137 

his  transgressions  that  he  hath  committed,  they 
shall  not  he  mentioned  unto  him :  in  his  righteous- 
ness that  he  hath  done  he  shall  live.  Have  I  any 
pleasure  at  all  that  the  wicked  should  die?  saith 
the  Lord  God :  and  not  that  he  should  return  from 
his  ways,  and  live  ?  But  when  the  righteous  turn- 
eth  away  from  his  righteousness,  and  committeth 
iniquity,  and  doeth  according  to  all  the  abomina- 
tions that  the  wicked  man  doeth,  shall  he  live? 
All  his  righteousness  that  he  hath  done  shall  not 
be  mentioned :  in  his  trespass  that  he  hath  tres- 
passed, and  in  his  sin  that  he  hath  sinned,  in  them 
shall  he  die.  Yet  ye  say.  The  way  of  the  Lord  is 
not  equal.  Hear  now,  O  house  of  Israel;  Is  not 
my  way  equal?  are  not  your  ways  unequal? 
When  a  righteous  man  turneth  away  from  his 
righteousness,  and  committeth  iniquity,  and  dieth 
in  them;  for  his  iniquity  that  he  hath  done  shall 
he  die.  Again,  when  the  wicked  man  turneth 
away  from  his  wickedness  that  he  hath  committed, 
and  doeth  that  which  is  lawful  and  right,  he  shall 
save  his  soul  alive."     (Ezekiel  xviii.  21-27.) 

In  these  passages  we  have  what  may  with  pro- 
priety be  denominated  the  decrees  of  God,  by 
which  his  whole  conduct  toward  the  children  of 
men  is  regulated.  They  teach  as  plainly  as  lan- 
guage can  express  anything,  that  the  promises 
and  threatenings  of  the  Almighty  are   all   con- 


138  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

ditional,  and  when  these  conditions  are  not  ex- 
pressed they  are  implied.  The  Lord  told  Jonah 
that  he  should  go  to  I^ineveh,  that  great  city,  and 
say,  Forty  days  and  Nineveh  shall  be  destroyed. 
Jonah  went  and  preached  as  the  Lord  commanded 
him.  !N"o  conditions  were  expressed,  yet  that  city 
was  not  destroyed.  Why?  Because  they  re- 
pented at  the  preaching  of  the  man  of  God.  This 
was  the  implied  condition.  The  Lord  told  David 
(I.  Samuel,  xxiii.  10-13)  that  Saul  would  come 
to  Keilah,  and  that  he  (David)  should  be  delivered 
into  his  hands.  No  conditions  were  expressed. 
But  David  was  not  delivered  into  Saul's  hands. 
Why?  He  arose  and  departed  from  Keilah.  This 
was  the  implied  condition.  By  this  general  rule, 
laid  down  by  the  Lord  himself  in  the  foregoing 
scriptures,  we  are  to  be  goverened  in  interpreting 
the  word  of  God.  "When  the  wicked  man  turn- 
eth  away  from  his  wickedness  that  he  hath  com- 
mitted, and  doeth  that  which  is  lawful  and  right, 
he  shall  save  his  soul  alive."  Does  not  this  teach 
that  man  is  a  moral  agent?  Does  it  not  also  teach 
that  the  salvation  of  the  soul  is  conditional?  Read 
Acts  xxvi.  20.  Paul  "  shewed  first  unto  them  of 
Damascus,  and  at  Jerusalem,  and  throughout  all 
the  coasts  of  Judea,  and  then  to  the  gentiles,  that 
they  should  repent  and  turn  to  God,  and  do  works 
meet  for  repentance."     The  doctrine  of  repentance 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  139 

and  turniiio:  to  God  is  the  uniform  doctrine  of  the 
Old  and  ^ew  Testaments.  But  Mr.  Thayer  says, 
page  317,  that  "no  repentance  can  save  from  the 
just  penalty  of  the  violated  law."  Mr.  Guild, 
author  of  "  The  Universalist's  Book  of  Reference," 
page  90,  says,  "Mankind  are  rewarded  and  pun- 
ished in  this  life."  Again,  "If,  therefore,  the 
justice  of  God  is  an  active  principle,  mankind  are 
as  much  rewarded  and  punished  here  as  they  ever 
will  be^  On  page  315  Mr.  Guild  says,  when  cofn- 
menting  on  II.  Corinthians,  i.  18-20,  "l!To  lan- 
guage can  more  clearly  express  the  fact  that  in 
relation  to  these  promises,  as  well  as  all  other  prom- 
ises of  God,  there  are  no  huts,  nor  ifs,  nor  ands,  nor 
conditions  about  it."  On  page  313  he  affirms  the 
same  thing.  Eight  in  the  face  of  God's  word, 
these  authors  teach  that  salvation  is  not  con- 
ditional, that  repentance  will  avail  nothing,  and 
that  "mankind  are  rewarded  and  punished  in  this 
life  all  they  ever  will  be. 

To  show  still  further  that  the  future  eternal  sal- 
vation of  the  soul  is  conditional,  I  will  examine  a 
few  more  passages.  "And,  behold,  one  came  and 
said  unto  him,  Good  Master,  what  good  thing 
shall  I  do,  that  I  may  have  eternal  life?  And  he 
said  unto  liim,  if  thou  wilt  enter  into  life,  keep 
the  commandments."  (Matthew  xix.  16,  17.) 
"He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved; 


140  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned."  (Mark 
xvi.  16.)  "Ye  will  not  come  unto  me,  that  ye 
might  have  life."  (John  v.  40.)  ''This  is  the 
will  of  him  that  sent  me,  that  every  one  which 
seeth  the  Son,  and  believeth  on  him,  may  have 
everlasting  life."  (John  vi.  40.)  'No  language 
can  be  more  explicit  than  that  employed  in  these 
passages.  They  show  most  positively  that  man  is 
a  moral  agent;  that  he  can  accept  or  reject  salva- 
tion. "Whatever  therefore  is  conditional  may  be 
lost ;  that  which  is  not  conditional  can  not  be  lost. 
But  Mr.  Guild  says  ''there  are  no  buts,  nor  ifs, 
nor  ands,  nor  conditions  about  it."  In  this  he 
flatly  contradicts  the  words  of  Jesus.  "  He  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved,  and  he 
that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned/'  Christ  puts 
faith  and  obedience  in  the  present  tense,  and  the 
salvation  and  damnation  in  the  future  tense.  But 
Mr.  Guild  says,  page  90,  that  "mankind  are  as 
much  rewarded  and  punished  here  as  they  ever 
will  be ; "  so  that  whether  a  man  believes  in  Jesus 
Christ  or  not  it  will  all  be  the  same  in  the  world 
to  come.  But  is  it  possible  that  any  man  who 
professes  to  believe  the  Bible  at  all  could  hold 
such  sentiments?  We  will  see.  On  page  318  Mr. 
Guild,  when  commenting  on  Ephesians  i.  9,  10, 
concludes  by  saying  that  "  reference  is  had  in  the 
text  not  simply  to  those  who  were  or  would  become 


CAREi^ULLY   EXAMINED.  141 

believers  in  this  world,  but  to  all  mankind,  whether 
believers  or  unbelievers^^'  This  is  a  plain  and  posi- 
tive declaration,  that  whether  men  believe  in 
Christ  or  not,  it  will  all  be  the  same  in  the  end. 
But  Jesus  said,  "He  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned." 

I  will  now  take  up  another  class  of  scriptures, 
which  teach  not  only  that  salvation  is  conditional, 
but  that  there  is  danger  of  coming  short  of  it. 
"  Enter  ye  in  at  the  strait  gate :  for  wide  is  the 
gate,  and  broad  is  the  way,  that  leadeth  to  de- 
struction, and  many  there  be  which  go  in  thereat : 
because  strait  is  the  gate,  and  narrow  is  the 
way,  which  leadeth  unto  life,  and  few  there  be 
that  Hud  it."  (Matthew  vii.  13,  14.)  "We  then, 
as  workers  together  with  him,  beseech  you  also 
that  ye  receive  not  the  grace  of  God  in  vain." 
(II.  Corinthians  vi.  1.)  "But  I  keep  under  my 
body,  and  bring  it  into  subjection:  lest  after  I 
ha.ve  preached  to  others,  I  myself  should  be  a 
castaway."  (I.  Corinthians  ix.  27.)  These  pas- 
sages confirm  what  I  said  before.  Salvation  is 
conditional,  and  therefore  there  is  danger  of  losing 
it.  If,  as  Mr.  Guild  says,  "there  are  no  but^?,  nor 
ifs,  nor  ands,  nor  conditions  about  it,"  why  did 
Christ  urge  the  people  to  "enter  in  at  the  strait 
gate?"  Why  did  Paul  beseech  his  brethren  not 
to  receive  the  grace  of  God  in  vain;  and  why  labor 


142  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

to  keep  his  body  under  ?  This  was  all  a  work  of 
supererogation.  Whether  they  entered  in  at  the 
strait  gate  or  not,  whether  they  took  the  broad  or 
narrow  way,  whether  they  received  the  grace  of 
God  in  vain  or  not,  whether  Paul  kept  his  body 
under  or  not,  it  would  all  amount  to  the  same 
thing  in  the  end.  There  are  "  no  conditions  about 
it."     This  is  Universalism. 

Having  demonstrated  the  fact  that  salvation  is 
conditional,  and  that  there  is  danger  of  losing  it, 
we  will  proceed  to  notice  that  sinners  can  and 
often  do  resist  the  means  which  God  has  employed 
to  bring  them  to  repentance  and  salvation.  "  Who 
hath  believed  our  report,  and  to  whom  is  the  arm 
of  the  Lord  revealed  ? "  (Isaiah  liii.  1.)  ''  Ye  will 
not  come  unto  me  that  ye  might  have  life."  (John 
V.  4.)  ''How  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy 
children  together,  but  ye  would  not."  (Matthew 
xxiii.  37.)  "  Then  Paul  and  Barnabas  said,  it  was 
necessary  that  the  word  of  God  should  first  have 
been  spoken  to  you,  but  seeing  ye  put  it  from  you, 
and  judge  yourself  unworthy  of  everlasting  life, 
lo,  we  turn  to  the  gentiles."  (Acts  xiii.  46.) 
"Now  as  Jannes  and  Jambres  withstood  Moses, 
so  do  ye  resist  the  truth."  (II.  Timothy  iii.  8.) 
"  Grieve  not  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God."  (Ephesians 
iv.  30.)  "Ye  do  always  resist  the  Holy  Ghost." 
(Acts  vii.  51.)     These  scriptures  teach  in  unmis- 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  143 

takable  language  that  men  can  and  do  resist  the 
force  of  truth,  and  also  the  strivings  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  ]N"ow  if  men  do  resist  the  power  of  truth, 
does  it  not  prove  that  they  are  moral  agents? 
Does  it  not  imply  the  power  of  choice ;  and  does 
it  not  prove  that  salvation  is  conditional  ?  What- 
ever therefore  is  conditional  may  be  lost.  But  if 
Universalism  be  true,  there  will  be  no  difference 
in  the  end.  Those  who  resist  the  truth  and  grieve 
the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  will  receive  just  as  bright 
a  crown  as  those  who  believing  obey  the  truth. 
Jannes  and  Jambres,  who  withstood  Moses,  and 
those  of  whom  Stephen  spoke,  who  did  always  re- 
sist the  Holy  Ghost,  will  be  as  happy  in  the  end 
as  the  purest  of  God's  saints. 

It  will  be  proper  in  this  connection  to  call  special 
attention  to  a  class  of  scriptures  which  teach  that 
there  will  come  a  time  when  it  will  be  too  late  to 
seek  and  obtain  salvation.  Bear  in  mind  that  in 
this  chapter  thus  far  it  has  been  shown  (1)  that 
man  is  a  moral  agent.  (2.)  That  salvation,  pres- 
ent or  future,  is  conditional.  (3.)  That  there  is 
danger  of  coming  short  of  this  salvation.  (4.) 
That  men  can  and  do  resist  the  means  which  God 
has  employed  to  save  them.  But  do  the  Script- 
ures teach  that  there  ever  will  come  a  time  when 
it  will  be  too  late  to  seek  and  obtain  salvation? 
We  will  examine  and  see.     "  And  the  Lord  said, 


144  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

My  Spirit  shall  not  always  strive  with  man." 
(Genesis  vi.  3.)  *'  For  this  shall  every  one  that  is 
godly  pray  unto  thee  171  a  time  when  \ho\x  mayest 
be  found."  (Psalms  xxxii.  6.)  "Seek  ye  the 
Lord  while  he  may  he  found,  call  ye  upon  him  while 
he  is  near."  (Isaiah  Iv.  6.)  "Because  I  have 
called,  and  ye  refused;  I  have  stretched  out  my 
hand,  and  no  man  regarded :  *  *  *  J  also  will 
laugh  at  your  calamity ;  I  will  mock  when  your  fear 
cometh.  *  *  ^  Then  shall  they  call  upon  me, 
but  I  icill  not  answer;  they  shall  seek  me  early,  hut 
shall  not  find  me."  (Proverbs  i.  24-26.)  "For 
the  grave  can  not  praise  thee,  death  can  not  cele- 
brate thee  :  they  that  go  down  into  the  pit  can  not 
hope  for  thy  truth."  (Isaiah  xxxviii.  18.)  "When 
once  the  master  of  the  house  is  risen  up,  and  hath 
shut  to  the  door,  and  ye  begin  to  stand  without, 
and  to  knock  at  the  door,  saying.  Lord,  Lord,  open 
unto  us ;  and  he  shall  answer  and  say  unto  you,  J 
know  you  not  whence  ye  are."  (Luke  xiii.  25.) 
"  Ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall  not  find  me :  and  where 
I  am,  thither  ye  can  not  come."  (John  vii.  34.) 
1^0 w  if  there  is  no  possibility  of  being  finally  lost, 
and  if  it  will  never  be  too  late  to  be  saved,  what 
could  have  induced  the  sacred  writers  to  employ 
such  language?  "  Seek  the  Lord  while  he  may  be 
found,  call  ye  upon  him  while  he  is  near."  Does 
not  this  clearly  imply  that  there  will  be  a  time 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  145 

w^hen  he  can  not  be  found?  "  They  shall  call  upon 
me,  hut  I  will  not  answer."  "  They  shall  seek  me 
early,  but  shall  not  iind  me."  Why  ?  Because  they 
resisted  the  truth  and  grieved  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
would  not  come  to  Christ  until  it  was  too  late. 
ISTow  do  the  Scriptures  teach  that  those  who  resist 
the  truth,  set  at  naught  the  counsel  of  God  and 
grieve  the  Holy  Spirit  until  the  day  of  their  death, 
as  thousands  have  done,  that  they,  while  in  the 
grave  or  beyond  it,  will  seek  and  obtain  salvation  ? 
I  affirm  that  there  is  not  a  single  text  in  the  Bible 
that  teaches  any  such  thing. 

Your  attention  will  now  be  invited  to  a  class  of 
scriptures  which  teach  in  the  clearest  possible  lan- 
guage that  the  future  destiny  of  man,  whether  of 
happiness  or  misery,  depends  upon  his  course  of 
conduct  in  this  life.  Before  entering  directly  upon 
the  scripture  testimony,  I  think  it  would  be  proper 
to  give  a  clear  and  distinct  statement  of  the  views 
of  Universalist  authors.  Mr.  Guild,  author  of 
^^The  Universalist's  Book  of  Reference,"  page 
288,  says,  *'It  is  nowhere  said  in  the  Bible  that 
Jesus  Christ  came  to  this  world  to  save  men  in 
another."  On  pages  313  and  315  he  affirms  the 
future  eternal  salvation  of  all  men  unconditionally. 
On  page  90  he  says,  "  Mankind  are  rewarded  and 
punished  in  this  life."  On  ]3age  184  he  says, 
"  Men  can  not  perform  deeds  in  time  and  receive 

10 


146  UNIVERSAL    RESTOKATION 

reward  for  tliem  in  eternity."  Tliey  must  reap  in 
the  field  where  they  sow.  On  page  185  he  says, 
"  God  has  in  no  place  nor  at  any  time  informed 
his  creatures  that  he  would  judge  and  reward 
them  after  they  were  dead,  or  in  another  world." 
On  page  185  he  says,  "Both  the  righteous  and 
the  wicked  are  judged  and  awarded  in  the 
earth." 

If  then,  as  Universalists  teach,  men  are  judged 
and  awarded  in  this  life,  if  they  must  reap  in  the 
same  field  where  they  sow,  and  if  the  future  and 
eternal  salvation  of  all  men  is  unconditionally 
fixed,  then  it  does  not  matter  what  they  do  in  this 
life.  It  will  all  be  the  same  in  the  end.  There 
will  be  no  difference  between  a  good  man  and  a 
bad  man.  Yesterday  a  man  in  cool  blood  murder- 
ed two  of  his  children,  and  in  less  than  an  hour 
took  his  own  life ;  but  no  matter  for  that,  he  will 
be  just  as  well  off  in  the  end  as  the  most  pious 
Christian.  A  man  may  steal,  and  rob,  and  defraud, 
and  commit  murder,  and  then  cut  his  throat  and 
go  to  heaven  just  the  same  as  if  he  had  been  a 
Christian  all  his  life.  He  may,  with  Paul,  believe 
in  Christ,  or  with  Voltaire,  reject  him;  he  may, 
with  John,  believe  the  scriptures,  or  with  Paine, 
curse  them ;  he  may  be  an  atheist,  a  deist,  or  a 
Christian,  whichever  he  likes  best,  the  end  will  be 
exactly  the  same.     This  is  Universalism,  and  they 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED..  147 

dare  not  deny  it.  Mr.  Guild  says,  "There  are  no 
buts,  nor  ifs,  nor  ands,  nor  conditions  about  it;" 
all  men  will  ultimately  be  saved,  whether  they  are 
believers  in  this  world  or  not.  But  how  are  those 
to  be  saved  in  the  future  world  that  are  unbelievers 
in  this  world?  Mr.  Thayer,  page  205,  admits  that 
"  thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin." 
Mr.  Guild,  page  288,  says  that  ''  it  is  nowhere  said 
in  the  Bible  that  Jesus  Christ  came  to  this  world  to 
save  mankind  in  another."  How  then  will  those 
be  saved  in  another  world  that  are  not  saved  in 
this  ?  They  admit  that  all  men  are  not  saved  in 
this  life.  Then  they  affirm  that  Christ  did  not 
come  into  this  world  to  save  man  in  the  other. 
How  then,  I  ask  again,  will  those  be  saved  in 
another  world  that  are  not  saved  in  this  ?  We  are 
forced  to  this  conclusion,  that  the  salvation  of 
IJniversalism  is  a  Christless  salvation. 

We  will  now  turn  to  the  Scriptures,  and  see 
whether  the  future  happiness  and  misery  of  men 
do  not  depend  upon  their  conduct  in  this  life.  In 
this,  as  well  as  all  other  questions  relating  to  the 
future  destiny  of  man,  the  word  of  God  must  be 
the  standard  of  proof  and  appeal.  "God  so  loved 
the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but 
have  everlasting  life.'''  (John  iii.  16.)  In  this  pas- 
sage faith  in  Jesus  Christ  is  made  the  condition  of 


148  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

salvation.  Those  who  do  not  believe  shall  perish. 
But  what  does  the  word  perish  mean  ?  It  can  not 
mean  natural  or  physical  death,  for  then  it  would 
prove  that  all  who  believe  in  Christ  are  not  to  die 
physically.  But  they  do  die,  and  hence  the  word 
perish  can  not  mean  natural  death.  The  word 
perish  is  put  in  opposition  to  everlasting  life.  By 
connecting  with  this  one  or  two  other  passages,  it 
will  assist  us  in  comprehending  its  meaning.  In 
John  viii.  21-24  Jesus  says  to  the  Jews,  "I  go  my 
way,  and  ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall  die  in  your 
bins :  whither  I  go,  ye  can  not  come.  *  *  I  said 
therefore  unto  you,  that  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins : 
for  if  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in 
your  sins."  "  He  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall 
not  see  life;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on 
him."  (John  iii.  36.)  The  unbeliever  is  to  perish; 
he  shall  die  in  his  sins;  he  shall  not  see  life,  and 
the  wrath  of  God  is  to  abide  upon  him.  If  Uni- 
versalism  be  true,  the  unbeliever  that  perishes, 
and  that  dies  in  his  sins,  who  shall  not  see  life, 
and  upon  whom  the  wrath  of  God  abides,  is  to 
be  treated  in  all  respects  the  same  as  though  he  had 
lived  by  faith,  and  died  in  the  Lord.  It  is  strange 
that  men  in  the  face  of  such  plain  declarations 
of  God's  word  would  dare  to  say  that  the  eternal 
destiny  of  man  is  unconditional;  that  the  un- 
believer who  dies  in  his  sins  will  be  just  as  well 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  149 

off  in  the  end  as  those  who  believingly  obey  the 
gospel  of  Christ.  But  this  they  affirm  in  spite 
of  God's  declarations  to  the  contrary.  They  say 
to  the  scoffer,  to  the  libertine,  to  the  drunkard,  to 
the  robber,  to  the  thief,  to  the  murderer,  and  to 
all  wlio  blaspheme  the  name  of  God,  Go  on  in 
your  way,  eat,  drink,  and  be  merry,  for  in  the  end 
you  shall  be  just  as  well  off'  as  the  most  devout 
Christian  that  ever  lived. 

"For  he  that  soweth  to  his  flesh  shall  of  the 
flesh  reap  corruption ;  but  he  that  soweth  to  the 
Spirit  shall  of  the  Spirit  reap  life  everlasting." 
(Galatians  vi.  8.)  Here  we  have  the  sowing  and 
the  reaping,  seed-time  and  harvest.  Two  distinct 
classes  of  persons,  the  one  sows  to  the  flesh  and 
the  other  to  the  Spirit.  Then  we  have  two  seasons, 
the  sowing-time  and  the  harvest.  Men  do  not 
sow  and  reap  at  the  same  time.  Paul  puts  the 
sowing  in  the  present  tense,  and  the  reaping  in  the 
future  tense — he  shall  reap.  In  the  ninth  verse 
the  apostle  says,  "  In  due  season  we  shall  reap," 
showing  most  conclusively  that  the  reaping  was 
in  tlie  future,  and  that  a  man  should  reap  what 
he  sowed.  "Whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  that  shall 
he  also  reap."  But  Universalist  authors  say  it 
does  not  matter  what  a  man  sows  in  this  life,  it 
will  all  be  the  same  in  the  future  world.  A  man 
may  continue  to  sow  to  the  flesh  till  the  day  and 


150  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

hour  of  his  death,  and  then  as  a  last  and  final  act 
take  his  own  life,  and  fare  just  the  same  as  the 
good  man,  who  by  faith  in   Jesus    Christ   went 
through   this   world   sowing   to    the  Spirit.     But 
what  does  the  word  "corruption"  mean?     It  can 
not  mean  natural  death,  for  then  it  would  prove 
that  those  who  sow  to  the  Spirit  would  not  die. 
But  they  do  die.     The  most  devout  of  earth  die. 
What  then  does  the  w^ord  coruption  mean  ?     It  is 
to  be  reaped  in  the  future — "■shall  reap   corrwp- 
tion.^'     It  should  be  observed,  also,  that  it  stands 
in  opposition  to  the  words  "  everlasting  life."     If 
those  who  through  this  life  sow  to  the  Spirit  shall 
reap  everlasting  life,  then  those  who  sow  to  the 
flesh  shall  reap  everlasting  death.     If  it  is  a  fact, — 
that  all  men  will  fare  alike  in  the  world  to  come, — 
if  Paul  believed  this,  why  did  he  say  to  his  breth- 
ren, in  the  ninth  verse,  "Let  us  not  be  weary  in 
well-doing,  for  in  due  season  we  shall  reap  if  we 
faint  not?"     He  might  have  said.  If  ye  become 
wear}^  in  well-doing  try  something  else,  the  end 
will  be  exactly  the  same.     No  matter  what  a  man 
sows  in  this  life,  the  future  will  be  the  same.     But 
can  it  be  that  men  in  the  face  of  such  scriptures 
can  believe  that  all  men  will  be  saved.     Mr.  Guild, 
when  speaking  of  the  final  ingathering  of  all  into 
Christ,  page  318,  says  that  "  reference.is  had  in  the 
text  (Ephesians  i.  9,  10)  not  simply  to  those  w^ho 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  151 

were  or  would  become  believers  in  this  world,  but 
to  all  mankind,  whether  believers  or  unbelievers/* 
Can  any  language  be  more  plain  ?  "  All  mankind, 
whether  believers  or  unbelievers,^^  whether  they  be- 
come believers  in  this  world  or  not,  will  be  gathered 
into  Christ  at  last.  A  man  may  sow  the  seeds  of 
unbelief  all  his  life,  and  die  blaspheming  the  name 
of  Jesus,  but  he  will  be  saved  all  the  same  as 
Paul,  who  lived  and  died  in  the  faith  of  the  gospel 
of  Christ.     This  is  Universalisyn. 

To  show  still  further  that  the  future  destiny  of 
man  is  directly  affected  by  his  course  in  this  life,  I 
will  call  attention  to  a  passage  in  I.  Peter  i.  3-5. 
"Blessed  be  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  which  according  to  his  abundant 
mercy  hath  begotten  us  again  unto  a  lively  hope 
by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  from  the  dead, 
to  an  inheritance  incorruptible,  and  undefiled,  and 
that  fadeth  not  away,  reserved  in  heaven  for  you, 
who  are  kept  by  the  power  of  God  through  faith 
unto  salvation  ready  to  be  revealed  in  the  last 
time."  Heie  we  have  the  fact  of  an  inheritance 
in  heaven  and  an  eternal  salvation.  For  whom  is 
this  inheritance  reserved?  Peter  says,  for  those 
"  who  are  kept  by  the  power  of  God  through  faith 
unto  salvation."  But  are  all  men  kept  by  the 
power  of  God  through  faith  f  Can  it  be  said  that 
the  infidel,  the  atheist,  and  the  blasphemers  are 


152  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

kept  by  the  power  of  God  through  faith  ?  Let  it 
be  particularly  observed  that  this  incorruptible 
iuheritance  is  reserved  for  those,  and  for  those 
only  who  are  kept  by  the  power  of  God  through 
faith.  But  Ilniversalists  say  it  is  reserved  for  all 
alike,  whether  believers  or  unbelievers.  Herein 
they  contradict  the  plain  word  of  God. 

E'ow  turn  to  Matthew  vi.  19,  20.  "Lay  not  up 
for  yourselves  treasures  upon  earth,  where  moth 
and  rust  doth  corrupt,  and  where  thieves  break 
through  and  steal:  but  lay  up  for  yourselves 
treasures  in  heaven,  where  neither  moth  nor  rust 
doth  corrupt,  and  where  thieves  do  not  break 
through  nor  steal."  In  this  passage  we  have 
three  points  settled.  (1.)  The  future  state  of 
man  is  regulated  to  a  large  extent  by  his  course  in 
this  life.  (2.)  That  he  may  or  may  not  lay  up 
treasures  in  heaven.  (3.)  That  the  heaven  spoken 
of  in  this  place  must  be  the  future  abode  of  the 
saints,  for  it  is  put  in  opposition  to  the  earth.  As 
a  reason  why  men  should  lay  up  a  treasure  in 
heaven,  the  Savior  adds,  "  For  where  your  treas- 
ure is  there  will  your  heart  be  also."  "  An  earth- 
ly-minded man  proves  that  his  treasure  is  below ; 
a  heavenly-minded  man  shows  that  his  treasure  is 
above."  Do  the  Scriptures  anywhere  teach  that 
those  who  refuse  or  neglect  to  lay  up  a  treasure  in 
heaven,  while  on  earth,  may  or  can  do  so  after 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  153 

they  have  gone  away  from  this  world  ?  .  But  Uni- 
versalists  say  it  will  all  amount  to  the  same  thing 
in  the  end.  The  miser  who  grinds  the  face  of  the 
poor,  robs  the  widow  and  orphan  of  the  last 
earthly  comfort,  and  then  dies  grasping  his  bags 
of  gold,  will  be  just  as  sure  of  a  crown  of  life  as 
he  who,  like  his  Master,  "  went  about  doing  good." 
To  say  the  least,  it  is  certainly  very  strange  that 
if  Jesus  came  into  this  world  to  teach  Univers- 
alism  he  should  have  employed  language  and 
used  illustrations  such  as  would  most  naturally 
prove  the  very  opposite.  To  strengthen  the  hearts 
of  his  disciples  under  persecution  and  trial,  he 
said,  "Rejoice  and  be  exceeding  glad,  for  great  is 
your  reward  in  heaven;  for  so  persecuted  they  the 
prophets  which  were  before  you."  But  Univers- 
alist  authors  say  it  is  not  so.  'No  man  will  be  re- 
warded in  the  world  to  come  for  anything  he  may 
have  done  here.  Those  that  persecuted  the  dis- 
ciples will  be  just  as  happy  and  have  just  as  bright 
a  crown  as  the  disciples  themselves. 

"  Except  a  man  be  born  again,  he  can  not  see 
the  kingdom  of  God."  .(John  iii.  3.)  It  does  not 
matter  whether  the  kingdom  of  God  here  means 
the  kingdom  of  grace  on  earth,  or  the  kingdom  of 
glory  hereafter;  for  if  a  man  may  not  see  the 
kingdom  of  grace  in  this  world  he  will  hardly  see 
the  kingdom  of  glory  in  heaven.     Thousands  die 


154  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

who  have  not  been  born  again, — they  die  in  unbe- 
lief and  sin ;  but  according  to  Universalism,  they 
shall  all  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  glory ;  for  ev- 
ery man  is  fully  rewarded  or  punished  in  this  life; 
every  man  finds  his  heaven  or  hell  in  what  he 
does;  there  is  no  reward  nor  punishment  beyond 
this.  Jesus  did  say  (Mark  x.  29,  30)  that  those 
who  had  left  all  for  his  sake  and  the  gospel's 
should  receive  a  hundred-fold  now  in  this  time, 
and  in  the  world  to  come  eternal  life.  The  Spirit 
told  John  to  say  that  those  who  w^ere  faithful  unto 
death  should  have  a  crown  of  life.  Paul  fought 
the  good  fight  of  faith,  and  looked  for  a  crown  of 
life.  This  looks  very  much  like  a  future  reward. 
But  Universalista  say  it  is  all  a  mistake.  The 
worst  man  that  ever  lived  will  have  just  as  bright 
a  crown  as  Paul. 

In  this  chapter  the  following  points  have  been 
set  forth  and  established:  (1.)  The  promises 
and  threatenings  in  the  Bible  are  all  conditional. 
Where  these  conditions  are  not  expressed  they 
are  always  implied.  (2.)  Man  is  a  moral  agent, 
hence  this  life  is  a  probation.  (3.)  The  present 
and  eternal  salvation  of  man  is  conditional.  (4.) 
Men  are  in  danger  of  coming  short  of  this  salva- 
tion. (5.)  Sinners  can  and  do  resist  the  means 
W'hich  God  has  employed  to  save  them.  (6.) 
There  will  come  a  time  when  it  will  be  too  late  to 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  155 

seek  aud  obtain  salvation.  (7.)  Future  rewards 
and  punishments  depend  upon  the  compliance  or 
non-compliance  with  the  conditions  set  forth  in 
the  gospel  of  Christ.  (8.)  The  future  reaping 
will  be  according  to  the  sowing  in  this  world. 
"Whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also 
reap."  (9.)  Only  those  who  are  kept  by  the 
power  of  God  through  faith,  shall  enter  into  and 
possess  the  eternal  inheritance.  (10.)  Men  while 
on  earth  may  or  may  not  lay  up  treasures  in 
heaven.  (11.)  Only  those  who  have  been  born 
again  shall  see  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Do  the  Scriptures  warrant  us  in  the  belief  that 
those  who  reject  Christ  and  all  the  means  of  grace 
while  on  earth  can  and  will  accept  them  after 
death  ?  Is  it  anywhere  said  that  they  will  come 
to  Christ  after  death?  If  those  who  believingly 
obey  the  gospel  of  Christ  while  on  earth  shall 
have  everlasting  life,  then,  in  the  language  of 
Peter,  I  ask,  "What  shall  the  end  be  of  them  that 
obey  not  the  gospel  of  God?" 

In  closing  this  chapter,  I  wish  to  invite  special 
attention  to  a  few  points.  If  this  is  a  state  of  retri- 
bution,— if  all  men  are  fully  rewarded  and  pun- 
ished in  this  life,  as  Universalists  teach, — then 
what  is  a  man's  moral  status  .in* death?  If  he 
has  any  character  at  all  it  must  be  purely  nega- 
tive.    IS'o thing  that  he  did  in  life  attaches  to  him 


156  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

in  death,  for  he  has  been  fully  rewarded  for  what- 
ever good  he  did,  and  fully  punished  for  all  the 
evil  he  did.  He  is  neither  a  saint  nor  a  sinner. 
In  point  of  character  he  is  nothing.  It  is  not 
possible  to  avoid  this  conclusion  on  the  assump- 
tion that  this  is  a  state  of  retribution  and  not  of 
probation.  But  Mr.  Thayer,  on  page  205,  affirms 
that  thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin. 
How  can  this  be,  if,  as  he  teaches  on  page  275. and 
304,  men  are  fully  punished  and  fully  rewarded  in 
this  life?  Now  I  affirm  that  if  this  is  a  state  of 
retribution,  where  men  are  fully  rewarded  and 
punished,  they  die  without  any  distinctive  charac- 
ter at  all.  They  are  neither  saints  nor  sinners. 
On  page  231,  when  treating  on  the  resurrection, 
Mr.  Thayer  says,  "Through  this  resurrection 
change,  this  uplifting  into  the  image  of  God,  all 
must  pass  alike,  differing  only  in  degree;  saint 
and  sinner,  believer  and  unbeliever,  Christian  and 
pagan."  What!  saints  and  sinners,  believers  and 
unbelievers  in  the  resurrection?  How  can  that 
be?  "Where  did  they  get  those  characters?  In 
this  life,  or  in  death,  or  between  death  and  the 
resurrection?  Another  curious  fact  is,  that  in  the 
resurrection  there  will  be  no  diiference  between  a 
saint  and  a  sinner ;  all  are  to  pass  through  this 
change  alike.  A  saint  is  no  better  than  a  sinner, 
and  a  believer  is  no  better  than  an  unbeliever. 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  157 

Another  curious  point.  Universalist  authors 
very  generally  agree  in  saying  that  "  Christ  did  not 
come  to  this  world  to  save  men  in  another."  4Iow 
then  will  those  be  saved  in  another  world  tliat 
are  not  saved  here?  Why,  Mr.  Thayer  says,  page 
231,  that  Christ's  "redeeming  agency  does  not 
*«ease  at  death,  but  takes  up  the  sonl  at  its  en- 
trance upon  the  resurrection  world,  and  enlight- 
ens, guides,  and  instructs  it  in  divine  things  till  it 
attains  to  that  state  of  perfection,  purity,  and  bless- 
edness, described  by  the  term  'heaven.'"  On 
pa;^e  229  he  says,  "  Christ  saves  men  after  death 
by  the  same  means  and  in  the  same  way  as  before 
death."  And  yet  "  Christ  did  not  come  into  this 
world  to  save  men  in  another."  At  one  time  these 
authors  teach  that  all  men  are  fully  rewarded  and 
punished  in  this  life,  and  at  another  that  Christ 
did  not  come  into  this  world  to  save  men  in 
another.  Again :  Christ  saves  after  death  the  same 
as  before  death;  and  then  again,  that  all  men, 
saints  and  sinners,  will  be  saved  in  the  resurrec- 
tion. Universalism  is  a  system  of  self-contradic- 
tions. 


158  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  X. 

ALL  PUNISHMENT  CORRECTIVE. 

The  proposition  to  be  investigated  in  this 
chapter  will  include  the  nature,  design,  and  end 
of  punishment.  The  proposition  is  not  whether 
punishment  does  sometimes  lead  to  reforma- 
tion, but  does  it  alw-ays  lead  to  that  end?  It  is 
not  whether  God  does  sometimes  punish  men  to 
make  them  better,  but  is  this  the  end  of  all  his 
punishments  ?  It  is  not  whether  some  men  under 
chastisement  come  to  Christ,  but  do  all  men  come 
to  him?  It  will  be  necessary,  in  the  first  place,  to 
state  cleai^y  and  distinctly  the  views  of  Univers- 
alist  authors.  Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  "  Theology  of 
Universalism,"  page  291,  declares  that  "all  punish- 
ment is  corrective."  On  page  289  he  says,  ''  Grod 
punishes  them  [sinners]  not  for  their  evil  or  injury, 
but  for  their  good ;  to  restore  them  to  obedience." 
Mr.  Guild,  author  of  "  The  Universalist's  Book  of 
Reference,"  page  90,  says,  "  If,  therefore,  the 
justice  of  God  is  an  active  principle,  mankind  are 
as  much,  rewarded  and  punished  here  as  they  ever 
will  be."     On  page  101   he  says,  "  Can  not  God 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  159 

reward  and  punish  liis  creatures  all  they  merit  in 
time,  and  in  eternity  bestoio  upon  them  immortal- 
ity, as  his  gift  through  grace?  Certainly."  On 
page  104  he  says,  ^'  God  punishes  to  reform  and 
make  hetter.  His  punishments  are  disciplinary, 
emendatory,  and  salutary."  On  page  312  he  says, 
"Punishment  signifies  correction;  and  correction 
signifies  to  reform  and  make  better."  In  these 
extracts  we  have  presented  the  nature,  design,  and 
end  of  punishment,  as  held  and  taught  by  Uni- 
versalists.  It  is  corrective,  disciplinary,  salutary, 
and  the  end  is  the  reformation  of  the  sinner. 
Whenever,  therefore,  punishment  ceases  to  be  cor- 
rective and  reformatory,  it  is  cruel  and  unjust.  It 
should  be  observed,  also,  that  this  punishment  is 
confined  exclusively  to  this  world.  Before  pro- 
ceeding further  I  wish  to  invite  special  attention 
to  another  point.  On  page  378  Mr.  Guild  says, 
"  "We  are  the  only  people  who  do  not  provide  some 
way  for  the  sinner  to  escape  the  just  punishment 
of  his  sins.  We  teach  that  the  punishment  of  siu 
is  certain  and  sure,  and  absolutely  unescapable 
and  unavoidable."  On  pages  90  and  101  he  says 
that  the  punishment  of  sin  is  confined  to  this 
world.  Mark  these  points.  Mr.  Thayer,  on  page 
205,  says,  "Thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief, 
and  sin."  E'ow  let  us  put  these  points  together. 
Mr.  Guild  says  there  is  no  way  for  the  sinner  to 


160  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

escape  the  just  punishment  of  his  sins.  This  pun- 
ishment is  confined  exclusively  to  this  world.  Mr. 
Thayer  says  thousands  die  in  sin.  Two  questions: 
First :  if  this  punishment  is  confined  to  this  world, 
how  is  it  that  thousands  die  in  sin?  Second:  if 
there  is  no  way  to  escape  the  punishment  of  sin, 
when,  where,  and  how  will  those  be  punished  that 
die  in  sin? 

But  let  us  test  another  point.  TJniversalist 
authors  say  that  punishment  of  sin  is  confined  to 
this  world,  and  that  no  man  can  by  any  possibility 
escape  a  just  punishment  for  all  his  sins.  They 
further  state  that  ''all  punishment  is  corrective,'* 
that  it  is  for  the  purpose  of  restoring  sinners  to 
obedience;  to  reform  and  make  better;  it  is  disci2:>lin- 
ary,  emendatory,  and  salutary.  E^ow  let  us  test  this 
principle.  The  antediluvians  became  so  wicked 
and  corrupt  that  God  determined  to  cut  them  off; 
so  he  sent  a  great  flood  and  swept  them  all  away. 
i^ow  it  would  be  interesting  to  know  how  they 
were  corrected  and  restored  to  obedience.  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah,  those  wicked  cities,  were  suddenly 
destroyed,  and  the  inhabitants  cut  oft*  and  sent 
out  of  the  world — corrected  and  reformed,  I  sup- 
pose. Ananias  and  his  wife,  for  lying  to  the  Holy 
Ghost,  were  suddenly  struck  dead — corrected  and 
restored  to  obedience!  Pharaoh  and  his  host  were 
arrested  and  overthrown  in  the  sea  for  their  abom- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  161 

inable  wickedness — corrected  and  restored  to  obedi- 
ence! One  can  hardly  imagine  how  it  is  possi- 
ble for  men  with  the  Bible  before  them  to  fall  into 
such  glaring  absurdities.  But  this  is  Univer- 
salism. 

But  Mr.  Gruild  has  still  another  way  of  getting 
all  men  saved.  On  page  311  he  says,  ^'  Sin  in 
man  has  its  origin  in  the  animal  nature,  and  his 
animal  nature  is  destined  to  be  destroyed.  JSToth- 
ing  but  the  spiritual  nature  of  man  can  survive  the 
tomb."  So  when  the  animal  nature  is  destroyed, 
that  will  be  the  end  of  sin.  Sin,  then,  does  not 
affect  the  spiritual  nature  of  man?  But  on  page 
334  he  says,  "  Moral  death  is  the  result  of  sin, 
which  every  man  commits."  But  if  sin  belongs 
to  the  animal  nature,  how  can  that  produce  moral 
death?  Mr.  Guild  and  Mr.  Thayer  both  teach 
that  the  resurrection  means  more  than  a  physical 
change.  What  more?  These  authors  say  that  it 
means  a  spiritual  change — a  resurrection  from 
moral  death.  But  where  is  the  necessity  for  such 
a  change,  since  sin  belongs  to  the  flesh  or  animal 
nature,  and  that  animal  nature  is  to  be  destroyed? 
In  one  place  they  teach  that  all  men  are  fully 
rewarded  and  punished  in  this  life;  in  another, 
that  thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin ; 
in  another,  that  Christ  did  not  come  into  this 
world  to  save  men  in  another;  in  another,  that 
u 


162  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

Christ  saves  men  after  death  the  same  as  before 
death ;  in  another,  that  all  men  will  need  a  spirit- 
ual change  in  the  resurrection ;  in  another,  that  sin 
belongs  to  the  animal  nature,  and  that  animal 
nature  is  to  be  destroyed.  There  is  no  man  living 
that  can  harmonize  Universalism  with  itself,  much 
less  with  the  word  of  God. 

But  our  purpose  in  this  chapter  is  to  show  the 
nature  and  design  of  punishment.  First,  it  is  to 
sustain  the  honor  and  dignity  of  the  authority  by 
which  the  government  is  established  and  adminis- 
tered. This  is  a  fundamental  principle  in  all 
good  government,  whether  civil,  ecclesiastical,  or 
moral.  Second,  to  protect  the  innocent  from  the 
danger  to  which  they  would  be  exposed  if  the 
offender  were  permitted  to  go  unpunished.  Third, 
to  be  an  example  to  others.  Fourth,  the  refor- 
mation of  the  offender.  These  four  elements, 
neither  one  of  which  can  be  dispensed  with, 
enter  into  and  form  a  part  of  all  good  government. 
While  God  in  the  order  of  his  wonder-working 
providence  does  sometimes  punish  the  wicked  as 
a  means  to  bring  them  to  repentance  and  obedi- 
ence, he  often  punishes  as  an  end,  to  maintain  the 
dignity  and  honor  of  his  government  and  to  pro- 
tect the  innocent.  It  was  so  with  the  antedilu- 
vians, the  Sodomites,  and  Pharaoh  and  his  host. 

Do  the  Scriptures  furnish  us  with  any  infoima- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  163 

tion  on  this  question?  We  will  search  and  see. 
^'  Now  no  chastening  for  the  present  seemeth  to  be 
joyous,  but  grievous:  nevertheless,  afterward  it 
yieldeth  the  peaceable  fruit  of  righteousness  unto 
them  which  w^ere  exercised  thereby."  (Heb.  xii. 
11.)  Mark  the  language.  It  is  only  such  as  are 
properly  exercised  by  this  chastisement  that  are 
benefited.  But  are  all  men  thus  exercised  by  chas- 
tisement ?  Are  all  men  corrected  and  reformed  by 
punishment?  "Though  thou  shouldest  bray  a 
fool  in  a  mortar  among  wheat  with  a  pestle,  yet 
will  not  his  foolishness  depart  from  him."  (Prov. 
xxvii.  22.)  He  was  a  fool  when  he  was  put  into 
the  mortar,  and  a  fool  when  he  came  out — neither 
reformed  nor  restored  to  obedience. 

"  Why  should  ye  be  stricken  any  more  ?  ye  will 
revolt  tnore  and  more  :  the  whole  head  is  sick,  and 
the  whole  heart  faint."  (Isaiah  i.  5.)  God  had 
punished  them  again  and  again,  but  they  would 
not  reform.  They  had  become  worse  and  worse, — 
worse  even  than  the  ox, — a  sinful  and  rebellious 
nation.  "  Thou  hast  stricken  them,  but  tbey  have 
not  grieved ;  thou  hast  consumed  them,  but  they 
have  refused  to  receive  correction  :  they  have  made 
their  faces  harder  than  a  rock;  they  have  refused 
to  return."  (Jeremiah  v.  3.)  In  this  case  the 
punishment  was  very  severe;  but  they  would  not 
grieve,  they  would  not  return,  and  thej^  refused  to 


164  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

receive  correction.  Instead  of  reforming,  they 
made  their  faces  harder  than  a  rock.  IsTotwith- 
standing  such  plain  declarations  of  God's  word, 
Ilniversalist  authors  say  that  "all  punishment  is 
corrective."  Was  it  corrective  in  this  case?  I^o. 
They  refused  to  be  corrected.  Pharaoh  and  his  peo- 
ple were  punished  again  and  again,  hut  only  grew 
worse  and  worse,  until  God  swept  them  away. 
They  were  neither  corrected  nor  reformed. 

"And  I  also  have  given  you  cleanness  of  teeth 
in  all  your  cities,  and  want  of  bread  in  all  your 
places:  yet  have  ye  not  returned  unto  me,  saith 
the  Lord."  (Amos  iv.  6.)  Ko  less  than  five  times 
is  it  said  in  this  chapter  that  they  would  not  re- 
turn unto  the  Lord.  He  had  given  them  cleanness 
of  teeth;  he  withheld  the  rain;  he  smote  them 
with  blasting;  he  sent  pestilence  among  them;  yet 
he  says,  "  Yet  have  ye  not  returned  unto  me."  In 
the  eleventh  verse  he  says,  "I  have  overthrown 
some  of  you,  as  God  overthrew  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah: yet  have  ye  not  returned  unto  me,  saith 
the  Lord."  This  language  is  so  plain  that  the 
wayfaring  man,  though  a  fool,  need  not  err 
therein.  They  were  punished  in  various  ways, 
but  still  refused  to  return, —  just  as  multiplied 
thousands  are  doing  now. 

"  And  men  were  scorched  with  great  heat,  and 
blasphemed  the  name  of  God,  which  hath  power 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  165 

over  these  plagues :  and  they  repented  not  to  give 
him  glory.  *  *  -H  And  there  fell  upon  men 
a  great  hail  out  of  heaven,  every  stone  about  the 
weight  of  a  talent:  and  men  blasphemed  God  be- 
cause of  the  plague  of  the  hail;  for  the  plague 
thereof  was  exceeding  great.'^  (Rev.  xvi.  9,  21.) 
Severe  as  these  punishments  were,  and  long  as  they 
continued,  the  people  only  grew  worse  and  worse 
— no  moral  or  religious  change  w^hatever.  What 
supreme  folly  for  men,  in  the  face  of  such  plain 
declarations  of  God's  word,  to  say  that  "  all  pun- 
ishment is  corrective," '  and  tends  to  restore  men  to 
obedience.  As  a  rule,  punishment  does  not  bring 
men  to  Christ ;  it  is  the  goodness  of  God  that  lead- 
eth  men  to  repentance.  Were  the  Egyptians  re- 
formed and  restored  to  obedience  by  punishment? 
If  so,  w^here,  and  how  ?  Were  the  Sodomites  re- 
stored to  obedience?  Jude  thought  not,  for  he  says 
they  are  left,  suffering  the  vengeance  of  eternal 
■fire.  Deliver  me  from  such  a  restoration  to  obedi- 
ence. Is  this  the  w^ay  of  salvation  ?  Is  this  the  way 
that  Jesus  came  into  this  world  to  open  up  ?  Yes; 
this  is  the  way  according  to  Universalism ;  sinners 
are  |>unished  for  their  sins  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law  in  order  to  reform  them.  But  thousands  have 
died  in  the  very  act  of  disobeying  God.  Mr. 
Thayer,  on  page  205,  admits  that  "  thousands  die 
in  unbelief  and  sin."     When  and  how  will  they  be 


166  UNIVERSAL    KESTORATION 

restored  to  obedience  ?  Do  you  say  after  death  ? 
But  this  can  not  be.  Why?  Because  Univers- 
alist  authors  say  that  this  life  is  a  state  of  retribu- 
tion, and  not  of  probation  ;  that  men  are  fully 
rewarded  and  punished  in  this  life ;  that  no  man 
can  be  punished  or  rewarded  in  the  world  to  come 
for  anything  he  did  while  here;  they  must  reap 
in  the  same  field  where  they  sow;  every  man  finds 
his  heaven  or  hell  in  what  he  does.  This  is  Uiii- 
versalism.  If  this  be  true,  we  are  forced  to  the 
conclusion  that  when  men  become  so  desperate- 
ly wicked  that  they  can  not  remain  any  longer 
on  earth,  God  punishes  them  by  cutting  them 
ofi'  and  taking  them  to  heaven.  But  this  will 
not  do,  for  these  same  authors  say  that  all  men 
will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrec- 
tion. On  page  211  Mr.  Thayer  says,  "The  res- 
urrection is  not  simply  being  lifted  out  of  tlie 
mortal  into  the  immortal,  out  of  the  earthly  into 
the  heavenly,  but  out  of  the  imperfect  into  the 
perfect,  out  of  tlie  weakness  and  frailty  and  sin- 
fulness of  our  present  estate  into  the  strength  and 
holiness  and  spiritual  completeness  of  the  future 
state."  On  page  210  he  says,  "The  resurrection 
is  a  moral  and  spiritual  change — the  aitastasis  or 
raising  up  of  the  soul."  On  page  334  Mr.  Guild 
says,  "As  in  the  earthly  man  (Adam)  all  die 
physically  and  morally,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  167 

be  made  alive  physically  and  morally."  So,  then, 
men  are  not  to  be  saved  from  sin  and  its  effects 
until  the  resurrection.  But  if  men  are  fully  pun- 
ished in  this  world  for  all  their  sins,  out  of  what 
state  of  sin  and  moral  death  are  they  to  be  raised 
in  the  resurrection?  And  further,  if  all  men  are 
to  be  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law,  and 
if  they  are  found  sinful  and  morally 'dead  at  the 
time  ot  the  resurrection,  then  there  is  no  w^ay  of 
avoiding  the  conclusion  that  men  must  be  pun- 
ished in  the  resurrection.  But  here  is  another 
difficulty.  Mr.  Thayer  says  that  all  are  imperfect; 
all  will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection. 
Mr.  Guild  says  they  are  morally  dead.  What,  then, 
becomes  of  the  soul  between  the  death  and  resur- 
rection of  the  body?  It  can  not  be  in  heaven,  for 
nothing  unholy  or  unclean  can  ever  enter  there. 
It  can  not  be  in  hell,  for  Universalists  say  there  is 
no  such  place.  Where,  then,  is  it?  It  must  be 
somewhere,  and  in  some  state  of  punishment. 
But  that  will  not  do,  for  all  men  are  fully  re- 
warded and  punished  in  this  world.  I  frankly 
confess  that  according  to  the  teachings  of  Univers- 
alist  authors  I  can  tell  nothing  about  the  state  or 
condition  of  the  soul  after  death.  Whether  it  is 
dead  or  alive,  here  or  there,  I  can  not  tell.  Paul 
thought  he  knew  something  about  it  when  he  ex- 
pressed a  desire  to  depart  and   be  with   Christ, 


168  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

which  he  allowed  would  be  far  better.    But  he 
must  have  been  mistaken. 

To  further  illustrate  the  absurdities  of  Univers- 
alism,  with  regard  to  the  nature  and  design  of 
punishment,  I  will  introduce  a  few  more  passages 
of  scripture.  Bear  in  mind  that  Universalist  au- 
thors teach  that  "  all  punishment  is  corrective; " 
that  all  men  are  rewarded  and  punished  in  this 
world  all  they  ever  will  be;  that  "  pimishment  sig- 
nifies correction,  and  correction  signifies  to  reform 
and  make  better."  In  II.  Timothy  iii.  13,  Paul 
says  that  ^'  evil  men  and  seducers  wax  worse  and 
worse,  deceiving,  and  being  deceived."  In  I. 
Timothy  iv.  2,  he  speaks  of  those  whose  con- 
science were  seared  with  a  hot  iron ;  and  in 
Ephesians  iv.  19,  he  says  that  "  some  were  past 
feeling,  having  given  themselves  over  unto  las- 
civiousness,  to  work  all  uncleanness  with  greedi- 
ness." Here  we  have  three  classes  of  characters. 
The  first  were  waxing  worse  and  worse ;  the  second 
had  a  conscience,  but  it  was  seared ;  the  third  were 
past  feeling.  When  and  how  will  such  persons 
be  restored  to  obedience?  Will  they  be  punished 
for  their  sins?  But  they  are  past  feeling,  growing 
worse  and  worse.  And  thousands  die  in  this  con- 
dition; die  as  they  lived;  die  cursing  and  blas- 
pheming the  name  of  God.  They  have  no  feeling 
whatever  about  their  future  destiny.     Some  die  by 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINEIX  169 

their  own  hands,  others  in  .a  drunken  stupor. 
When  will  they  be  corrected  and  restored  to 
obedience  ?  Kot  after  death,  for  men  are  fully 
rewarded  and  punished  here.  If  men  are  pun- 
ished after  death  for  anything  they  did  here,  then 
this  is  a  state  of  probation.  Mr.  Guild  says,  page 
90,  ''If  the  justice  of  God  is  an  active  principle, 
mankind  are  as  much  rewarded  and  punished  here 
as  they  ever  will  be."  No  punishment  after  this 
life.  Here  is  a  man  who  murders  his  wife,  and 
the  next  moment  kills  himself;  how  is  he  to  be 
punished  for  this  double  crime,  committed  in  the 
very  last  moment  of  his  life?  The  author  of  the 
"Exposition  of  Universalism,"  page  15,  says,  "Set 
it  down,  as  one  of  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  Uni- 
versalism, that  no  man  can,  by  any  possibility, 
escape  a  just  punishment  for  his  sins."  Mr.  Guild, 
page  378,  says,  "  We  [Universalists]  are  the  only 
people  who  do  not  provide  some  way  for  the  sin- 
ner to  escape  the  just  punishment  of  his  sins.  We 
teach  that  the  punishment  of  sin  is  certain  and 
sure,  and  absolutely  unescapable  and  unavoidable." 
When,  where,  and  how  is  that  man  to  receive  a 
just  punishment  for  all  his  sins,  who  willfully 
murders  his  fellow-being,  and  in  the  same  moment 
kills  himself?  It  should  not  be  forgotten  that 
this  punishment  of  sin,  which  Universalists  say  is 
certain  and  sure,  and  which  no  man,  by  any  pos- 


170  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

eibility,  can  escape,  is  confined  to  this  world. 
A  man  must  reap  in  the  same  field  where  he  sows. 
Then  those  who  are  ''  past  feehng,"  and  those 
whose  "  conscience  is  seared  with  a  hot  iron,"  and 
the  man  who  murders  his  wife  and  then  kills  him- 
self, all  in  the  last  moment  of  his  life,  receive  a 
just  punishment  for  all  their  sins  in  this  life.  It 
is  absolutely  impossible  for  such  men  to  receive  a 
just  punishment  for  their  sins  in  this  life. 

"We  will  examine  another  class  of  scriptures.  In 
II.  Thessalonians  ii.  12,  Paul  speaks  of  those  who 
had  pleasure  in  unrighteousness;  James  v.  5, 
speaks  of  some  w^ho  were  lovers  of  pleasure  more 
than  lovers  of  God;  and  David,  in  Psalms  Ixii.  4, 
tells  of  some  who  delighted  in  lies  and  rejoiced  to 
do  evil.  When  will  such  persons  be  corrected  and 
restored  by  punishment?  They  are  lovers  of 
pleasure  more  than  lovers  of  God;  they  delight  in 
lies  and  rejoice  to  do  evil;  they  take  pleasure  in 
unrighteousness.  This  is  as  true  to-day  as  when 
the  sacred  Avriters  penned  these  words.  Men  and 
women  everywhere  take  pleasure  in  unrighteous- 
ness. They  are  lovers  of  pleasure  more  than 
lovers  of  God.  They  murder  and  lie  and  defraud 
and  steal  to  the  very  day  and  hour  of  their  death. 
They  do  not  pray,  nor  visit  the  house  of  God,  nor 
obey  any  of  the  commandments  of  God;  and  then 
die  as  they  lived.     The  love,  mercy,  and  goodness 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  171 

of  God,  the  intercessions  of  Jesus,  the  strivings  of 
the  Spirit,  the  prayers  and  expostulations  of  good 
men  and  women,  and  the  chastening  of  the  Lord, 
all  failed  to  bring  them  to  obedience.  They  cared 
for  none  of  these  things,  but  waxed  worse  and 
worse,  and  in  the  midst  of  their  wickedness  died 
cursing  Grod.  If  all  punishment  is  corrective,  and 
confined  to  this  world,  when  and  how  will  such 
persons  be  restored  to  obedience?  God  calls  man- 
kind in  various  ways  and  through  various  instru- 
mentalities to  turn  away  from  sin.  For  a  hundred 
and  twenty  years  God  called  and  waited  on  the 
inhabitants  of  the  Old  World,  but  they  would  not 
forsake  sin.  Jesus  wept  over  Jerusalem  and  said, 
"  How  often  would  I  have  gathered  thee  together, 
but  ye  would  not."  At  last  God  swept  them  away 
in  the  midst  of  their  sins.  Universalists  would 
say  that  they  were  corrected  and  restored.  But 
how,  and  when?  Punished  and  restored  them 
by  cutting  them  off  and  taking  them  to  heaven? 
Paul  did  not  imagine  that  this  would  be  any  great 
punishment ;  he  actually  desired  to  depart  and  be 
with  Christ,  which  he  said  was  far  better  than  to 
remain  here. 

Mr.  Guild,  on  pages  344  and  345,  says,  "  The 
consequences  of  a  man's  actions  can  not  extend  be- 
yond the  present  world,  to  which  all  of  his  actions 
are  confined''     Mr.  Thayer,  page  235,  says,  ^' It  is 


172  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

not  tlie  mere  act  of  dying,  or  passing  from  one 
world  to  another,  that  we  regard  as  affecting  that 
change  in  the  moral  condition  of  the  soul  which 
sets  it  heavenward  and  turns  all  its  impulses  and 
aspirations  toward  holiness  and  God;  but  it  is 
the  mighty  change  in  its  circumstances,  the  new 
and  powerful  influences  by  which  it  will  be  en- 
girded and  acted  upon."  The  moral  condition  of 
the  soul  is  to  be  changed  after  death.  But  how  ? 
By  the  mighty  change  in  its  circumstances.  But 
what  need  of  such  moral  change,  if  the  conse- 
quences of  a  man's  actions  do  not  extend  beyond 
this  world?  But  Mr.  Thayer  has  still  another 
theory.  On  pages  234-5,  he  says,  '^  The  Savior 
never  abandons  the  soul,  but  follows  it  in  this 
world,  and  into  all  worlds  beyond,  as  a  Guide,  and 
Teacher,  and  Redeemer,  till  it  is  found  and  re- 
stored." What  I  a  soul  lost  and  unrestored  be- 
yond this  world?  How  does  this  harmonize  with 
his  theology  on  other  points?  On  page  289  he 
declares  that  God  punishes  sinners  to  restore  them 
to  obedience.  Then  Christ  must  follow  the  soul 
into  other  worlds  to  punish  it;  for  if  the  soul  is 
^05^  and  unrestored  it  must  be  in  a  state  of  sin, 
and  if  in  a  state  of  sin  it  must  be  punished,  for 
Universalists,  as  has  been  shown,  hold  and  teach 
that  no  man  can,  by  any  possibility,  escape  the 
just  punishment  of  his  sins.      But  here  observe 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  173 

another  curious  fact.  Mr.  Thayer  says  that  the 
Savior  follows  the  soul  into  all  worlds  beyond 
till  it  is  found  and  restored.  Then,  he  says,  its 
moral  condition  is  changed  by  the  mighty  circum- 
stances with  which  it  will  be  engirded.  Again  he 
says  it  is  to  be  changed  in  the  resurrection,  for  the 
'''resurrection  is  a  moral  and  spiritual  change — the 
rising  up  of  the  soul.''  I  know  of  no  theory  held 
by  intelligent  men  that  involves  as  many  self-con- 
tradictions as  the  theory  of  Ilniversalism.  The 
authors  not  only  contradict  each  other,  but  each 
contradicts  himself. 

If  the  sacred  writers  believed  that  all  punish- 
ment is  corrective,  and  confined  to  this  world, 
they  were  very  unfortunate  in  the  selection  of 
words  to  express  their  views.  "He  that  despised 
Moses'  law  died  without  mercy  under  two  or  three 
witnesses:  of  how  much  sorer  punishment,  sup- 
pose ye,  shall  he  be  thought  worthy,  who  hath 
trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  hath 
counted  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  wherewith  he 
was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and  hath  done 
despite  unto  the  spirit  of  grace?"  (Heb.  x.  28-29.) 
Those  that  despised  or  rejected  the  law  of  Moses 
died  without  mercy;  they  were  put  to  death, 
(^um.  XV.  30.)  But  of  how  much  sorer  punishment 
shall  they  be  considered  worthy  that  reject  Christ, 
that  count  the  blood  of  the  covenant  an  unholy 


174  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

thing.  "  Counting  this  unholy,  or  common,  inti- 
mates that  they  expected  nothing  from  it  in  a  sac- 
rificial or  atoning  way."  By  thus  rejecting  Christ, 
and  setting  the  atonement  aside,  they  do  "  despite 
unto  the  Spirit  of  grace."  The  punishment  of  such 
is  to  be  sorer  than  death.  Those  that  rejected  the 
law  of  Moses  died ;  and  there  is  no  punishment  in 
this  world  that  is  sorer  than  death.  Hence  a  pun- 
ishment that  is  sorer  than  death  must,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  be  after  death.  Thousands  have 
rejected  Christ,  and  counted  his  blood  an  unholy 
or  common  thing,  and  continued  in  this  course  till 
death.  When  and  where  are  they  to  receive  a 
punishment  that  is  sorer  than  death  ?  It  was  a  sin 
to  reject  or  despise  the  law  of  Moses,  but  it  is  a 
far  greater  sin  to  reject  or  despise  the  blood  of 
Christ;  hence  their  punishment  is  to  be  propor- 
tionately greater. 

It  will  be  pertinent  to  the  argument  to  notice  in 
this  connection  that  if  all  punishment  is  corrective, 
and  confined  to  this  world,  then  no  man  is  respon- 
sible for  his  influence.  He  may  do  what  he  pleases 
during  his  life ;  it  will  all  be  the  same  after  death. 
Mr.  Paine  while  living  caused  many  to  reject 
Christ,  and  since  his  death  his  '^Age  of  Reason" 
has  led  many  others  to  reject  Christ.  But  no 
matter  for  this.  Mr.  Paine  is  just  as  well  off  as 
the   most    devout   Christian   that  ever  lived   on 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  175 

earth.  Mr.  Paine  was  fully  punished  while  here 
for  all  the  evil  he  did,  and  Paul  was  fully  re- 
warded for  all  the  good  he  did ;  so  they  are  both 
crowned.  Paul  counted  all  things  loss  for  Christ, 
and  fought  the  good  fight  of  faith.  Paine  reject- 
ed Christ,  and  lived  and  died  a  blasphemer,  but  is 
saved  all  the  same  as  Paul. 

There  is  one  other  important  point  to  be  consid- 
ered in  connection  with  this  subject,  which  is  this: 
It  is  the  uniform  teaching  of  the  Bible  that  the 
righteous  sufi:er  in  this  world  as  well  as  the  wick- 
ed, and  in  some  respects  more.  Jesus  said  to  his 
disciples,  and  to  us  as  well,  that  those  that  would 
follow  him  should  have  persecution  and  tribula- 
tion. They  should  be  hated  of  all  men,  and  even 
put  to  death.  That  innumerable  throng  that  John 
saw,  who  had  washed  their  robes  and  made  them 
white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  had  ''  gone  out  of 
great  tribulation."  David  said  that  the  afflictions 
of  the  righteous  were  many.  Paul  said  that  all 
who  would  live  godly  in  Christ  Jesus  should  suf- 
fer persecution.  In  Hebrews  he  furnishes  a  list 
of  those  who  had  sufiered  for  righteousness'  sake. 
Some  were  tortured,  others  "had  trial  of  cruel 
mockings  and  scourgings,  yea,  moreover  of  bonds 
and  imprisonment:  they  were  stoned,  they  were 
sawn  asunder,  were  tempted,  were  slain  with  the 
sword:    they    wandered  about  in  sheepskins  and 


176  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

goatskins;  being  destitute,  afflicted,  tormented." 
But  why  thus  afflicted  and  tortured?  Because 
they  were  the  servants  of  the  most  high  God. 
Wicked  men  and  devils  hated  them.  Go  back  to 
the  days  of  the  martyrs,  when  good  men  and  good 
women  were  tortured  in  every  way  that  the  wick- 
ed imagination  of  exceedingly  wicked  men  could 
devise,  burned  to  ashes,  sawn  asunder,  cast  to 
wild  beasts,  their  tongues  cut  out,  all  because  they 
were  Christians.  Thousands  of  the  best  men  and 
women  the  world  ever  knew  were  treated  in  this 
way,  while  those  who  caused  these  men  and 
women  to  suffer  were  taking  pleasure  in  unright- 
eousness, and  rejoicing  in  lies.  Many  of  them 
were  past  feeling;  their  consciences  were  seared 
with  a  hot  iron.  If  Universalism  is  true,  these 
holy  men  and  women  of  God  were  being  fully  re- 
warded for  all  the  good  they  did,  and  those  wick- 
ed, God-forsaken  wretches,  who  gathered  about  the 
tire  and  laughed  and  jeered  to  see  the  bodies  of 
the  saints  consumed,  were  being  fully  punished  for 
all  the  sin  they  committed.  Some  of  the  best 
men  and  women  the  world  ever  knew  have  sulfer- 
ed  most.  Some  of  the  worst  men  and  women  the 
world  ever  knew  have  sufferd  the  least.  Why? 
Because  their  consciences  were  seared  with  a  hot 
iron,  and  they  were  past  feeling. 

In  the  seventy-third  psalm  we  have  this  whole 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  177 

question  clearly  and  forcibly  presented.  The 
psalmist  says  he  was  envious  at  the  foolish 
when  he  saw  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked. 
They  were  not  in  trouble  as  other  men;  they 
had  more  than  heart  could  wish.  They  pros- 
pered in  the  world,  and  increased  in  riches; 
and  their  eyes  stood  out  with  fatness.  This  was 
the  condition  of  the  wicked  as  the  psalmist  saw 
it.  But  the  people  of  God  had  waters  of  a  full 
cup  wrung  out  to  them.  "  All  the  day  long  have 
I  been  plagued,  and  chastened  every  morning." 
^'Yerily,  I  have  cleansed  my  heart  in  vain." 
That  is,  ''it  is  no  advantage  to  worship  the  true 
God."  These  wicked  men  are  not  in  trouble  as 
we  are.  They  are  rich,  and  we  are  poor.  Some 
imagine  that  the  psalmist  was  mistaken  in  his 
view,  for  when  he  went  into  the  sanctuary  he 
saw  things  in  a  different  light.  Yery  true.  At 
tirst  he  saw  men  only  in  this  life,  and  concluded 
that  the  wicked  had  it  better  than  the  righteous. 
^'  Until  I  went  into  the  sanctuary,  then  understood 
I  their  endJ^  I  saw  that  with  all  their  prosperity 
they  were  standing  on  slippery  places,  and  would 
be  brought  down.  "Then  understood  I  their 
end."  When  I  entered  into  communion  with 
God,  light  spi'ung  up  in  my  mind.  I  saw  that  al- 
thougli  for  the  present  there  was  an  unequal  dis- 
tribution of  temporal  good  and  evil,  there  loas  an 

12 


178  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

end  when  Q-od  would  render  to  every  man  accord- 
ing to  his  works.     What  was  true  in  the  days 
of  the  psalmist  is  true  now.     Many  of  the  wicked 
are  prosperous.   Like  Dives,  they  fare  sumptuously 
every  day — they  have  more  than  heart  could  wish 
— while  many  a  humble  follower  of  Jesus  is  poor 
and  persecuted,  asking  to  he  fed  with  the  crumbs 
which  may  chance  to  fall  from  the  tables  of  the 
rich.    If  Universalism  be  true,  then  all  the  wicked 
who  are  prospered  in  this  world,  who  increase  in 
riches,  who  have  more  than  heart  could  wish,  who 
neither   fear  God  nor  regard  the  person  of  any 
man,  are  fully  punished  in  this  world  for  all  the 
evil   they    did;    and   all   the   righteous,   who   for 
Christ's  sake  counted  all  things  loss,  who  for  his 
sake  were  persecuted,  hated,  tortured,  and  burned 
at  the  stake,  were  fully  rewarded  in  this  world  for 
all  they  did  and  suffered.    Then  all  those  promises 
Avhich  seem  to  relate  to  another  world  must  be 
conlined   to   this.      Paul   having    fought   a   good 
fight,  thought  he  would  receive  a  crown  of  right- 
eousness.    John  said   to  those  that  would   over- 
come, they  should  have  a  crown  of  life.     Jesus 
said  his  Father  would  honor   all  that  serve  him. 
But  this  is  all  a  mistake.     Infidels,  atheists,  liber- 
tines, drunkards,  murderers,  thieves,  and  robbers 
will  have  just  as  bright  a  crown  as  the  most  de- 
vout Christian.     This  is  Universalism. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  179 

In  this  argument  the  theology  of  Universalism, 
respecting  the  nature  and  design  of  punishment, 
has  been  carefully  presented.  It  has  been  shown 
that  if  their  theory  is  correct  then,  1.  The  ante- 
diluvians, the  Sodomites,  and  others,  because  they 
had  become  too  wicked  to  remain  on  earth,  were 
suddenly  swept  away  and  taken  to  heaven.  2. 
There  are  four  principles  embodied  in  the  nature 
and  design  of  punishment.  3.  That  the  word  of 
God  plainly  teaches  that  punishment  is  only  cor- 
rective to  those  who  are  properly  exercised  there- 
by. 4.  That  many,  instead  of  being  reformed  by 
punishment,  only  grew  worse  and  worse.  5.  That 
some  take  pleasure  in  unrighteousness  and  rejoice 
iji  lies,  and  continue  in  that  state  till  death. 
Many  of  them  die  in  the  midst  of  their  sins.  6. 
That  the  righteous  in  many  instances  suffer  more 
in  this  world  than  the  wicked.  7.  It  has  been 
shown  that  if  Universalism  is  true,  all  the  prom- 
ises which  seem  to  relate  to  another  world  must 
be  confined  to  this  world,  and  that  all  men  will 
fare  alike  in  the  world  to  come.  8.  That  no  man 
is  accountable  to  G-od  for  his  influence. 

In   the   discussion    of  the  proposition   in  this 

chapter,  questions  like  the  following  have  been 

raised :     If  all  punishment  is  corrective,  and  con- 

•fined  to  this  world,  when  and  how  will  those  be 

reformed  that  die  in  the  act  of  disobeying  God  ? 


180  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

How  will  those  be  corrected  and  brought  to 
obedience  who  are  past  feeling — whose  conscience 
is  seared  with  a  hot  iron  ?  When  and  how  will 
those  be  reformed  that  only  grow  worse  and  worse 
under  punishment?  If  a  man  murders  his  wife, 
and  the  next  moment  kills  himself,  when,  where, 
and  how  will  he  be  corrected  and  reformed  by 
punishment?  It  will  not  do  to  say  that  he  is 
punished  after  death,  for  Universalists  say  this  is 
a  state  of  retribution  and  not  of  probation.  Men 
are  punished  and  rewarded  here  all  they  ever  will 
be.  Then  these  wicked  wretches  who  could  not 
be  reformed  by  punishment  in  this  world,  were 
cut  off,  or  cut  themselves  off',  and  went  to  heaven. 
But  this  will  not  do,  because  Universalist  authors, 
as  has  been  shown,  teach  that  all  men  will  need  a 
moral  and  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection. 
Then  where  are  they,  and  what  is  their  condition  ? 


\ 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  181 


CHAPTEH  XI. 

god's  attributes — THEIR  HARMONY  AND   PERFECTION. 

Arguments  in  favor  of  the  ultimate  holiness  and 
salvation  of  all  men  have  been  based  upon  the  at- 
tributes of  God.  Because  he  is  all- wise  or  omnis- 
cient, omnipresent,  just,  benevolent,  and  merciful, 
therefore  all  men  will  ultimately  be  saved.  If  man 
were  not  a  moral  agent,  and  if  there  were  no  con- 
ditions connected  with  the  plan  of  salvation,  such 
arguments  would  be  unanswerable.  It  is  pro- 
posed to  show  in  this  argument  that  there  is 
nothing  in  the  divine  attributes  more  in  favor  of 
the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men 
than  there  is  in  favor  of  their  present  salvation; 
also,  that  God  can  not  exercise  any  one  of  his  at- 
tributes, only  so  far  as  it  may  be  in  harmony  with 
every  other  attribute  and  perfection  of  his  nature. 
Of  tlic  secret  counsels  and  plans  of  God  we  know 
nothing.  All  we  have  to  do  is  to  carefully  obey 
what  he  has  been  pleased  to  reveal  to  us  in  his 
word. 


182  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

As  a  matter  of  convenience,  and  for  future  ref- 
erence, the  attributes  may  be  arranged  and  defined 
as  follows:  1.  Eternity.  This  implies  that  God 
always  was  and  always  will  be.  ''From  everlasting 
to  everlasting  J  ^  2.  Omniscience.  This  implies  in- 
finite wisdom  and  knowledge.  ''Known  unto  God 
are  all  his  works  from  the  heginningy  3.  Omnip- 
otence. This  implies  power — almighty  poAver. 
4.  Omnipresence.  This  signifies  that  God  exists 
in  all  places  at  the  same  time.  5.  Immutability. 
This  implies  that  God  is  always  the  same.  Eter- 
nally unchangeable.  6.  Justice.  This  is  that  per- 
fection of  the  divine  nature  whence  arises  the  abso- 
lute rectitude  of  his  moral  government.  7.  Good- 
ness, love,  benevolence,  and  mercy.  We  group 
these  perfections  of  the  divine  nature  together, 
for  they  may  with  propriety  be  regarded  as  modifi- 
ed expressions  of  the  same  thing. 

Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  "  Theology  of  Universalism," 
dwells  at  some  length  upon  the  attributes  of  God, 
and  argues  therefrom  the  ultimate  holiness  and 
salvation  of  all  men.  But  from  first  to  last  he 
seems  to  ignore  the  fact  that  God  is  a  being  of  ab- 
solute holiness.  He  proceeds  upon  the  hypothesis 
that  sin  is  only  a  finite  evil,  and  hence  can  not  be 
so  exceedingly  oftensive  to  God.  Connect  with 
this  their  theory  of  the  origin  of  sin,  and  we  can 
readily  understand  why  they  intimate  that  sin  is  no 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  183 

dreadful  aif'air.  In  plain  language,  they  make  God 
the  author  of  sin.  On  page  26  our  author  says,  "  If 
man  had  been  created  perfect  and  had  never  fallen 
into  any  kind  of  sin,"  &c.  On  page  67  he  says, 
"Here  again  is  a  reason  why  the  Creator  did  not 
make  man  perfect  in  the  beginning."  After  these 
monstrous  statements,  which  flatly  contradict 
the  word  of  God,  he  proceeds  to  found  arguments 
on  the  power,  wisdom,  goodness,  and  justice  of 
God,  leaving  out,  of  course,  the  holiness,  immuta- 
bility, eternity,  and  vengeance  of  God. 

We  will  now  proceed  to  examine  each  of  his 
arguments  based  upon  the  attributes.  Omnipo- 
tence. God  has  all  power.  He  is  therefore  able 
to  save  all  men,  and  will  save  them.  This  is  the 
sum  and  substance  of  his  argument.  On  page  58 
he  says,  "  The  result  of  our  investigation  respect- 
ing the  omnipotence  of  God  is  this:  That  his 
power  over  spirit  is  as  absolute  as  is  his  power 
over  matter ;  that  he  can  do  his  will  as  easily,  and 
that  he  will  do  it  as  certainly,  in  the  moral  world 
as  in  the  spiritual  world.  *  *  *  He  not  only 
has  the  power  to  reconcile  and  restore  all  things 
to  himself,  but,  ^in  the  dispensation  of  the  fulhiess 
of  times,'  he  loill  do  it."  On  page  57  he  says, 
"  The  day  and  the  hour  when  all  which  has  been 
promised  may  be  fulfilled,  we  may  not  know." 
Whether  in  this  world  or  the  next  our  author,  in 


184  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

this  connection,  does  not  presume  to  say,  but  on 
page  205  he  says,  "  Thousands  die  in  unbelief  and 
sin,''  so  that  it  seems  it  is  not  in  this  world 
where  all  will  be  saved.  E"ow  let  us  test  the 
strength  of  this  argument.  God  has  all  power, 
and  is  therefore  able  to  save  all  men.  Are  all 
saved  now  ?  If  not,  why  not?  God  has  all  power, 
yet  notwithstanding  multiplied  thousands  are  not 
now  saved.  If  all  men  will  ultimately  be  saved, 
because  God  has  the  power  to  save,  then  all  men 
are  now  saved  for  the  very  same  reason.  But  we 
know  that  all  men  are  not  now  saved.  Universal- 
ists  admit  this  themselves.  If,  then,  God  permits 
sin  to  exist,  notwithstanding  his  power  to  destroy 
it,  he  may  always  permit  it  to  exist.  God  is  im- 
mutable as  well  as  omnipotent.  Jesus  is  "  able  to 
save  to  the  uttermost."  Whom  ?  ''  All  that  will 
come  unto  God  by  him."  Why,  then,  are  not  all 
men  saved,  since  Jesus  is  able  to  save  to  the  utter- 
most? The  reason  is  obvious.  They  will  not 
come  unto  God  by  him.  And  I  now  affirm  that 
there  is  not  a  single  passage  in  the  Bible  that 
teaches  that  any  man  will  come  to  God  tJirough 
Christ  after  death. 

The  wisdom  of  God.  On  page  34  Mr.  Thayer 
says,  "  The  divine  knowledge  embraces  the  future 
and  final  condition  of  every  soul  of  man,  and  did 
embrace  it  from  the  beginning,  as  a  part  and  por- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  185 

tiou  of  the  original  plan  of  God,  inherent  in  the 
very  purpose  and  end  had  in  view  in  the  creation 
of  man."  On  page  39  he  argues  that  God  in  cre- 
athig  man  did  foresee  all  things  that  would  come 
to  pass,  and  so  arranged  his  plan  of  operation 
that  all  things  should  contribute  to  the  one  result, 
namely,  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of  all 
men.  lie  argues,  further,  that  it  would  not  be 
compatible  with  the  character  of  an  infinitely 
wise  God  to  create  a  soul,  knowing  at  the  time 
that  til  at  soul  would  sutler  eternally.  Let  us  ex- 
amine this  with  some  care,  for  it  is  one  of  the 
most  plausible  arguments  presented  by  Univer- 
salists.  "Known  unto  God  are  all  his  works  from 
the  beginning."  This  is  a  favorite  quotation  with 
our  author;  and  w^e  accept  it,  because  it  is  the  word 
of  God.  Take  up  the  history  of  the  past,  and  con- 
template the  mental,  moral,  and  physical  suffering 
of  the  race.  The  history  of  the  world  presents  to 
us  little  else  than  one  continued  scene  of  suffering 
and  anguish, — Avar,  famine,  pestilence,  and  dis- 
tress. God  knew  when  he  created  man  that  this 
would  be  the  result.  He  knew  that  man  would 
sin,  and  he  knew  that  he  would  punish  him  in 
ways  without  number.  God  saw  all  this  before  he 
said,  "Let  us  make  man."  And  yet  with  the  full 
knowledge  of  all  this  suffering  he  created  man. 
More  than  this,  Mr.  Thayer  says,  page  27,  "that 


186  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

God  (lid  not  make  man  perfect  in  the  beginning, 
but  determined  to  leave  him  to  perfect  himself 
through  toil,"  &c.     God  not  only  knew   that  he 
should  suffer,  but  determined  that  he  should  suf- 
fer.    This  is  Universalism.     "We  hold  that  God 
is  infinite  in  wisdom;  that  he  created  man  in  his 
own  image,  a  moral  agent,  and  determined  that 
those  who   would  violate  his  law  should    suffer. 
'-'The  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall  die.''     He  determin- 
ed also  that  "  whoever  would  beheve  on  the  Son 
of  God  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting 
life."     Now  to  the  point.     If  an  infinitely  wise 
God  would  create  man,  knowing  that  he  would 
suffer  as  thousands  have  suffered,  and  are  now  suf- 
fering, what  is  there  incompatible  with  the  charac- 
ter of  such   a  being  to  create  man,  knowing  that 
he  would  abuse  his  agency,  and  as  a  result  sufier 
endlessly  ?     God  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of 
him  that  dieth ;  and  yet  men  die— die  in  sin  and 
unbelief.     God  kneAV  that  it  would  be  so;  still,  he 
created   man.     Now   if  it   were    not  possible  for 
man  to  escape  endless  punishment,  then  it  would 
be  a  reflection  on  the  wisdom  of  God  to  have  cre- 
ated him.     But  since  man  is  a  moral  agent,  with 
the  privilege  of  choosing  life  or  death,  it  is  no  re- 
flection on  the  divine  character  to  have  thus  creat- 
ed him.     The  whole  difficulty  arises  from  a  want 
of  a  proper  discrimination  between  the  knowledge 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  187 

of  God  and  the  decrees  of  God.  God  has  decreed, 
and  it  will  stand  forever,  ''that  those  who  sow  to 
the  flesh  shall  of  the  flesh  reap  corruption,  and 
those  who  sow  to  the  Spirit  shall  of  the  Spirit 
reap  life  everlasting."  When  God  created  man  he 
knew  that  some  men  would  sow  to  the  flesh,  and 
some  would  sow  to  the  Spirit.  But  why  create  a 
man  when  he  knew  that  he  would  sow  to  the 
flesh,  and  consequently  reap  corruption?  When 
God  determined  to  create  man  he  determined  that 
he  should  be  a  free  agent,  with  full  power  to 
choose  for  himself,  and  that  he  should  eat  the 
fruit  of  his  doings.  The  promises  and  threaten- 
ings  of  the  Bible  all  stand  as  witnesses  of  this 
great  and  solemn  truth.  "  Whatsoever  a  man  sow- 
eth,  that  shall  he  also  reap." 

The  goodness  of  God.  On  page  67  Mr.  Thay- 
er, in  treating  on  the  goodness  of  God,  says,  "God 
of  course  has  established  the  world,  created  man, 
and  determined  his  present  and  future  condition. 
*  *  *  He  does  not  do  everything  at  once  by  a 
miracle,  but  gradually  by  appointed  agencies,  and 
according  to  the  laws  of  their  spiritual  nature. 
Each  day  has  its  specific  work,  each  event  its 
special  meaning."  If  each  day  has  its  work,  and 
each  event  its  specific  meaning,  what  is  the  special 
meaning  of  the  event  of  thousands  dying  in  un- 
belief AND  SIN?     Would  an  infinitely  good  being 


188  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

create  a  man  knowing  that  lie  would  live  and  die 
in  sin?  God  does  not  do  everything  at  once.  IS'o  ; 
for  this  same  author  says,  pages  234-5,  that  the 
Savior  follows  the  soul  in  this  world,  and  into 
all  worlds  beyond,  till  it  is  found  and  restored. 
The  great  difficulty  with  Mr.  Thayer's  theory  is 
that  he  can  not  find  a  single  passage  of  scripture 
to  sustain  him  in  the  belief  that  Christ  will  save  a 
soul  from  sin  after  death.  To  show  the  beauty 
of  Mr.  Thayer's  theory,  I  will  bring  together  a 
few  of  his  points.  How  is  a  man  saved  from  sin  ? 
On  page  316  he  says,  "  The  sin  is  punished  and 
forgiven,  the  penalty  of  transgression  is  inflicted, 
and  then  the  sinner  is  forgiven."  Mark  that. 
How  does  Christ  save  men  after  death?  On  page 
229  he  says,  Christ  saves  men  after  death  "by  the 
same  means  and  in  the  same  way  as  before  death." 
Then  Christ  follows  the  soul  in  this  world  and 
into  all  worlds  beyond,  punishing  and  inflicting 
upon  it  the  penalties  of  the  law.  Is  it  compatible 
with  the  character  of  an.  infinitely  good  being  to 
create  a  soul  knowing  that  it  would  sin,  and  that 
he  would  have  to  follow  it  in  this  world  and  into 
all  worlds  beyond,  inflicting  upon  it  the  penalties 
of  transgression  ? 

Another  fact  which  Universalists  would  gladly 
ignore  is  that  God,  notwithstanding  IiIr  goodness, 
does    permit    sin     and    misery    to     exist    here. 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  189 

They  teach  that  God  punishes  men  to  the  full  ex- 
tent of  the  law.  On  pfige  217  Mr.  Thayer  says, 
"ISTo  repentance  can  save  from  the  just  penalty  of 
the  violated  law."  So  there  is  no  escape.  Now 
let  us  put  this  together.  God  created  man  imper- 
fect in  the  beginning ;  he  knew  that  he  would  sin, 
and  determined  that  he  would  punish  him  for  that 
sin,  and  not  allow  him  any  means  of  escape.  We 
hold  that  God  created  man  perfect,  with  the  power 
to  choose  good  or  evil;  that  if  those  who  have 
chosen  evil  will  forsake  their  evil  way  and  return 
to  the  Lord,  as  a  merciful  and  good  Father  he 
will  have  mercy  on  them,  and  abundantly  par- 
don. We  hold  further  that  Jesus  is  able  to  save 
to  the  uttermost  all  that  will  come  unto  God  by 
him. 

The  justice  of  God.  Mr.  Thayer  commences 
h!s  argument  on  this  attribute  by  denying  the  doc- 
trine of  vicarious  atonement;  that  divine  justice 
did  not  demand  and  would  not  be  satisfied  with 
the  death  of  the  innocent  in  the  place  of  the  guilty. 
On  page  76  he  says,  "  The  divine  law  requires  us 
to  do  right;  we  disobey  and  do  wrong.  Here  is 
the  sin;  and  at  this  point  justice  enters  and 
promptl}"  demands  reparation, — not  mere  suffer- 
ing, but  reparation, — demands  that  the  sin  shall 
cease,  that  the  wrong  shall  be  made  right.  And 
how  is  this  to  be  done  ?     There  is  only  one  way 


190  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

of  doing  it,  and  that  is  by  saving  the  sinner  from 
his  sins.  Justice  demands  reparation,"  But  the 
sinner  is  the  guilty  party.  What  has  he  to  repair 
with  ?  How  can  he  render  satisfaction  to  the  law 
for  past  offenses  ?  How  then  is  this  reparation  to 
be  made  ?  Our  author  says,  ''  by  saving  the  sinner 
from  his  sins."  Will  this  render  satisfaction  to 
the  law?  Paul,  in  Romans  iii.  24-26,  says  that 
Jesus  was  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through 
faith  in  his  blood,  for  the  remission  of  sins  that 
are  past;  therefore  God  can  be  just,  and  the  justi- 
fier  of  him  which  believeth  in  Jesus.  "  Here  we 
learn  that  God  designed  to  give  the  most  evident 
displays,  both  of  his  justice  and  mercy.  Of  his 
justice  in  requiring  a  sacrifice,  and  absolutely  re- 
fusing to  give  salvation  to  a  .lost  world  in  any 
other  way,  and  of  his  mercy  in  providing  the 
sacrifice  which  his  justice  required."  Thus  be- 
cause Jesus  made  an  g^tonement,  rendered  satis- 
faction to  the  law,  God  can  now  be  just,  and 
justify  him  which  believeth  in  Jesus.  But  Uni- 
versalists  deny  this.  They  say  that  Jesus  Christ 
did  not  render  satisfaction  to  the  law.  How  then 
can  God  be  just  and  at  the  same  time  justify  the 
ungodly?  But  Mr.  Thayer  says,  justice  demands 
reparation.  In  what  way?  Why,  by  saving  the 
sinner  from  his  sins.  But  in  what  way  is  repara- 
tion made  to  the  law  by  saving  the  sinner  from 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  191 

his  sins  ?  It  is  simply  no  reparation  at  all.  Justice 
is  satisfied  without  anything  at  all.  On  page  77 
our  author  says  that  justice  demands  "that  all 
wrong  shall  give  place  to  right,  all  sin  shall  be  de- 
stroyed, and  all  evil  end  in  good."  But  on  what 
grounds  does  justice  make  this  demand?  ISTot  on 
the  ground  of  satisfaction,  but  without  satisfaction. 
If,  then,  justice  has  the  right  to  demand  reparation 
by  saving  the  sinner  from  his  sin,  is  then  justice 
just  in  not  saving  sinners  at  once?  Why  not  cut 
it  short  in  righteousness  ?  Why  permit  sin  and 
misery  to  exist? 

If  tiie  law  of  God  is  founded  injustice,  then  no 
man  can  ever  be  saved  unless  satisfaction  be  ren- 
dered to  the  law.  And  as  Universalists  deny  the 
doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement,  they  must  save 
men  without  meeting  the  claims  of  the  law,  in 
which  case  justice  would  be  unjust.  'No  sinner  can, 
by  any  possibility,  render  satisfaction  to  the  law 
for  past  offenses.  The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die. 
Justice  claims  the  death  of  the  sinner.  ]!*^ow,  if 
the  law  be  just  it  must  claim  the  death  of  the  sin- 
ner; hence,  his  release  from  the  claims  of  the  law 
without  satisfaction  would  be  unjust. 

Mr.  Guild,  author  of  "  The  Universalist's  Book 
of  Beference,"  page  338,  founds  an  argument  in 
favor  of  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of 
all  men  on  the  attributes.     I  will  give  the  substance 


192  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

of  his  points  as  he  presents  them.  (1.)  God  is 
merciful,  therefore  he  ivill  not  inflict  endless  pain  ujyon 
any  of  his  creatures.  If  because  God  is  merciful 
he  will  not  punish  endlessly,  for  the  very  same 
reason  he  will  not  punish  at  all.  (2.)  God  is  om- 
nipotent, therefore  his  plans  and  p)urposes  can  not  be 
defeated.  If  because  God  is  omnipotent  his  plans 
and  purposes  can  not  be  defeated,  then  his  plana 
and  purposes  must  now  be  carried  out.  It  must 
have  been  in  the  plan  and  purpose  of  God  that 
man  should  sin.  But  why  punish  a  man  for  car- 
rying out  the  plan  and  purpose  of  God  ?  (3.) 
God  is  love.  He  has  the  j)oioer  to  promote  the  good 
of  his  creatures,  and  has  the  disposition  to  do  so,  for 
he  is  love.  God  is  love,  and  yet  he  punishes  sinners 
to  the  fidl  extent  of  the  law.  !Now  if  the  law 
requires  endless  punishment,  there  is  nothing  in 
the  love  of  God  to  prevent  him  from  inflicting  it. 
If  God  has  the  power  and  disposition  to  promote 
the  highest  good  of  his  creatures,  and  still  permits 
them  to  sin,  and  then  punishes  them  for  their  sin, 
he  may  always  permit  them  to  sin,  and  may  always 
punish  them.  (4.)  God  is  unchangeable.  He  will 
endlessly  rem.ain  what  he  has  been  and  is  now.  God 
permits  sin  and  misery  to  exist  now;  he  is  un- 
changeable, therefore  he  will  always  permit  it  to 
exist.  Or  thus :  God  punishes  men  now;  he  is 
unchangeable,  therefore  he  always  will  punish  men. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  193 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  God  can  not 
exercise  any  one  of  his  attributes  unless  it  be  in 
perfect  harmony  with  every  other  attribute.  To 
illustrate.  God  is  omnipotent — hath  all  power  in 
heaven  and  on  earth;  yet  he  does  not  do  every- 1 
thing.  He  could  not  send  all  men  to  hell,  because 
that  would  violate  his  justice  and  love;  and  he 
could  not  take  all  men  to  heaven  for  the  very 
same  reason.  Those  who  contend  for  the  ultimate 
salvation  of  all  men  seem  to  ignore  the  fact  that 
God  is  a  being  of  other  attributes.  God  is  eter^ 
nally  in  harmony  with  himself. 

Again.  God's  goodness,  love,  mercy,  and  be- 
nevolence would  prompt  him  to  save  all  men  in 
the  future  state.  But  the  very  same  perfections 
of  the  divine  nature  would  prompt  him  to  save 
them  now.  But  all  men  are  not  now  saved;  and 
as  he  is  immutable,  he  can  never  exercise  these 
attributes  more  strongly  than  he  does  now.  God 
can  only  act  in  harmony  with  the  principles  of  a 
perfectly  righteous,  moral  government.  While 
the  love,  mercy,  and  benevolence  of  God  would 
prompt  him  to  bestow  salvation  upon  all  men, 
yet  the  non-compliance  of  the  sinner  with  the 
conditions  upon  which  he  has  promised  to  bestow 
this  saving  grace  render  it  impossible  for  him  to 
do  so  without  compromising  his  justice.  God  can 
only  be  just,  and  justify  him  that  belie veth  in 

13 


194  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

Jesus.  If  God  is  uncliangeable  we  have  no  reason 
to  expect  any  stronger  exhibitions  of  his  love, 
mercy,  and  benevolence  than  have  been  in  the 
past,  or  than  are  now.  Inasmuch,  therefore,  as 
he  permits  sin  and  misery  to  exist  now,  notwith- 
standing these  divine  perfections,  he  may  always 
permit  them  to  exist. 

God  is  omniscient, — or,  as  Paul  expresses  it, 
*'  Known  unto  God  are  all  his  works  from  the  be- 
ginning,'' — and  therefore  would  not  create  a  soul 
knowing  that  it  would  suffer  eternally.  But  God 
must  have  known,  when  he  created  man,  that  he 
would  sin,  and  that  he  would  suffer.  ISTow  if  the 
love,  mercy,  and  benevolence  of  God  would  per- 
mit him  to  create  a  man  knowing  that  he  would 
suffer  for  ten  years,  might  not  those  same  perfec- 
tions permit  him  to  create  a  man  when  he  knew 
that  he  would  suffer  for  twenty  years,  and  so  on 
to  eternity  ?  "  God  ia  love ; "  but  Paul,  in  Hebrews 
xii.  29,  says,  "Our  God  is  a  consuming  fire." 
These  two  declarations  teach  that  God  is  infinitely 
and  eternally  just,  and  infinitely  and  eternally  be- 
nevolent, and  is  therefore  as  determined  to  pun- 
ish the  wicked  eternally  as  to  save  and  bless  the 
righteous  eternally.  God  is  limited  by  the  imwMta- 
ble  perfections  of  his  own  nature  in  his  modes  of  oper- 
ation for  the  salvation  of  sinners. 

Universalist  authors,  so  far  as  I  have  seen,  have 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINEb.  195 

but  little  to  say  about  the  holiness  of  God ;  and  yet 
this  is  one  of  his  essential  attributes.  "  It  is  the 
glory,  luster,  and  harmony  of  all  his  other  perfec- 
tions." It  is  infinite,  immutable,  and  invariable. 
God  is  holy  in  and  of  himself.  Those  who  imag- 
ine that  the  endless  separation  of  the  wicked  from 
God  is  too  great  a  punishment,  have  but  feeble 
notions  of  the  absolute  holiness  of  God.  Sin  is 
not  only  an  offense  to  God,  but  is  directly  and 
eternally  opposed  to  the  very  nature  of  God. 
Some  idea  of  the  heinous  nature  of  sin  may  be 
formed  when  we  remember  that  no  less  a  sacrifice 
would  atone  for  it  than  the  gift  of  the  well-beloved 
and  only-begotten  Son  of  God, 

Should  it  be  urged  that  all  the  attributes  of  God 
are  in  favor  of  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation 
of  all  men,  we  answer,  They  can  be  no  more  in 
favor  of  that  than  they  are  in  favor  of  the  present 
holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men.  God  is  immut^ 
able,  and  will  remain  forever  the  same.  There  is 
no  argument  based  upon  the  attributes  of  God 
that  can  be  made  to  favor  the  future  salvation 
of  man,  but  may  with  equal  force  be  applied  to 
his  present  salvation.  It  is  but  reasonable  to  say 
that  if  ever  all  men  are  saved  it  will  be  when  God's 
attributes  grow  stronger  or  wicked  men  grow  bet- 
ter. But  God  is  immutable,  and  his  attributes  can 
never  be  any  stronger  than  they  now  are.     If  we 


196  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

say  that  wicked  men  will  grow  better,  we  contra^- 
diet  the  w^ord  of  God,  which  declares  that  they 
^'wax  worse  and  worseJ'^ 

On  pages  26  and  27,  Mr.  Thayer  argues  at  some 
length  on  the  beneficial  effect  of  sin.  He  talks  of 
the  virtues  of  charity,  generosity,  faith,  fidelity, 
truth,  &c.,  and  then  says  that  if  man  had  been 
created  perfect,  and  had  never  fallen  into  any 
kind  of  sin,  how  could  these  virtues  have  birth  or 
being?  On  page  28,  he  says  that  one  purpose  of 
our  present  condition  of  mingled  good  and  evil  is 
to  lead  us  up  in  the  thought  and  desire  for  an 
"  eternal  weight  of  glory."  On  page  31,  he  con- 
cludes his  argument  by  the  bold  declaration  that 
all  the  attributes  of  Deity  are  pledged  to  bring  the 
whole  race  of  man  out  of  this  state  of  mingled 
good  and  evil,  to  a  state  of  endless  perfection.  '  It 
is  an  insult  to  the  holiness  of  God,  to  say  that  he 
created  man  imperfect;  besides,  it  is  a  positive 
contradiction  of  the  word  of  God.  If  man  had 
been  created  perfect  and  had  not  fallen  into  sin, 
what  then  ?  Why,  Mr.  Thayer  says  that  life  would 
be  without  point,  ivithout  any  useful  or  elevating  aim.. 
"Why  ?  Because  man  would  have  known  nothing 
about  charity,  faith,  fidelity,  &c.  According  to 
Mr.  Thayer's  method  of  reasoning,  the  best  thing 
that  man  ever  did  was  to  sin,  and  the  best  thing 
that  God  ever  did  for  man  was  to  make  him  im- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  197 

perfect  in  the  beginning.  But  why,  if  sin  has 
done  so  much  for  man,  punish  him  for  doing  what 
God  intended  he  should  do?  Is  it  in  harmony 
with  the  love,  mercy,  and  goodness  of  God  to 
create  man  imperfect,  with  the  intention  that  he 
should  fall  into  sin,  and  then  punish  him  for  every 
sin  he  commits?     This  is  Universalism. 

The  whole  theory  of  Universalism  seems  to  be 
an  apology  for  the  sinfulness  of  man.  God  made 
him  imperfect  in  the  beginning,  and  all  the  attri- 
butes of  the  Deity  are  pledged  to  his  final  restora- 
tion. Sin  is  only  a  finite  evil,  and,  as  Mr.  Guild 
says,  belongs  to  the  flesh  or  animal  nature,  and 
that  animal  nature  will  be  destroyed.  "  Regener- 
ation," says  Mr.  Thayer,  page  182,  "does  not  im- 
ply a  change  in  the  moral  constitution  of  man, 
but  a  change  of  opinion  and  character.  ^  *  * 
It  is  not  wrought  in  a  moment,  by  a  supernatural 
and  almighty  influence,  but  is  the  result  of  a 
proper  use  of  divinely  appointed  means."  On 
page  174  he  says,  "It  [regeneration]  is  the  prod- 
uct of  months  and  years  of  watchings  and  pray- 
ings." This  is  simply  no  regeneration  at  all;  it  is 
a  kind  of  formal  reformation,  that  has  no  more  to 
do  with  the  heart  than  the  cold  and  cheerless 
philosophy  of  Plato.  Universalists  know  no 
more  about  rest  in  Jesus  Christ  than  Nicodemus 
did  when  he  came  to  Christ  by  night.    How  can 


198  I^NIYERSAL    RESTORATION 

they'i  They  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ;  they 
deny  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement;  they 
deny  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith;  they 
deny  the  doctrine  of  a  spiritual  regeneration;  and 
yet  they  say  that  the  attributes  of  the  Deity  are 
pledged  to  the  final  restoration  of  all  men.  But 
on  what  grounds?  With  them  the  death  and 
sufferings  of  Jesus  Christ  are  but  little  more  than 
the  death  of  any  other  good  man.  God  will  save 
all  men,  Christ  or  no  Christ.  They  may  live  and  die 
infidels,  as  many  have  done ;  but  no  matter  for  that, 
the  divine  attributes  are  all  pledged  to  save  them 
at  last.  And  when  men  become  so  desperately 
wicked  that  they  can  not  remain  longer  in  thio 
world,  God  will  sweep  them  away  and  take  them 
to  some  other  world,  where  he  can  better  save 
them  than  here.  Do  you  say  this  is  too  extrava- 
gant for  any  man  to  believe?  Let  us  see.  Mr. 
Thayer,  on  pages  234,  235,  says,  "  The  Savior  never 
abandons  the  soul.  *  *  *  He  follows  it  in 
this  world,  and  into  all  worlds  beyond^  as  a  Guide 
and  Teacher  and  Redeemer,  till  it  is  found  and 
restored."  But  do  the  Scriptures  warrant  us  in 
any  such  belief?  ^o.  There  is  not  a  single  pas- 
sage in  God's  book  that  teaches  any  such  doctrine. 
The  conclusions  reached  from  an  investigation 
of  the  harmony  and  perfection  of  the  divine  at- 
tributes are  these.     (1.)     All  the  attributes  of  the 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  199 

Deity  harmonize  in  the  sacrificial  offering  of  Jesus 
Christ  as  man's  substitute,  by  which  satisfaction 
was  rendered  to  the  law ;  insomuch  that  God  can 
now  be  just,  and  the  justifier  of  all  who  believe  in 
Jesus.  (2.)  All  the  attributes  harmonize  in  the 
ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of  all  who  com- 
ply with  the  published  conditions  of  salvation. 
^'Whosoever  believeth,  and  is  baptized,  shall  be 
saved."  (3.)  All  the  attributes  of  the  Deity  are 
in  favor  of  the  endless  punishment  of  all  who  will 
not  comply  with  the  conditions  of  salvation,  as  set 
forth  in  the  gospel  of  Jesus,  "  Whosoever  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned."  (4.)  God  is  as  perfect  in 
all  his  attributes  now  as  he  ever  was,  or  ever  will 
be.  God  is  eternally  unchangeable.  If,  therefore, 
he  can  punish  sin  for  a  life-time,  he  can,  in  the 
exercise  of  the  same  attributes,  punish  sin  eternally. 
God  is  love — he  always  was.  and  always  will  be. 
God  is  good — he  always  was,  and  always  will  be. 
God  is  just — he  always  was,  and  always  will  be. 
God  is  holy — he  always  was,  and  always  will  be. 
He  never  was  and  never  can  be  any  different  from 
what  he  now  is.  God  has  punished  and  does  punish 
sinners;  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  divine  per- 
fection to  prevent  him  from  punishing  sinners 
eternally.  When  God  destroyed  the  inhabitants 
of  Sodom  and  of  the  old  world,  all  his  attributes 
were  just  as  much  in  harmony  with  these  events 


200  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

as  when  lie  translated  Enoch  and  Elijah.  These 
are  facts  from  which  we  can  not  get  away. 

The  Scriptures  abundantly  teach  that  God  is 
infinitely  and  eternally  holy.  Sin  is  not  only 
offensive  to  God  because  it  is  the  transgression  of 
the  law,  but  because  it  is  opposed  to  his  very 
nature.  Obnoxious  and  abhorrent  as  sin  is  and 
must  forever  be  in  the  sight  of  God,  yet  men  do 
sin.  God  either  wills  it  or  he  does  not  will  it. 
If  we  say  that  he  wills  it,  then  why  punish  men 
for  it  ?  If  he  does  not  will  it,  why  not  save  men 
from  it  at  once  and  put  an  end  to  all  the  suffer- 
ing and  misery  that  flow  from  it?  Will  it  be 
more  in  harmony  with  the  divine  attributes  to 
save  men  from  it  in  the  future,  than  now  ?  If  so, 
why? 

Men  may  philosophise  as  they  please,  the  stub- 
born fact  of  present  sin  and  misery  stares  them 
continually  in  the  face.  They  may  reason  on  the 
attributes  from  morning  till  evening,  and  from 
evening  till  morning;  but  sin  exists.  We  must 
take  one  of  two  positions;  it  must  either  exist 
according  to  the  will  of  God,  or  against  it.  If  we 
say  it  exists  according  to  his  will,  then  it  may 
always  exist  according  to  his  will.  If  we  say  it 
exists  contrary  to  his  will,  then  it  may  continue  to 
exist  against  his  will  eternally.  God  is  immu- 
table— eternally  the  same.     Take   another  view. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  201 

If  sin  exists  according  to  the  will  of  God,  why 
punish  men  for  itV  Would  it  he  just  and  merciful 
to  punish  men  for  doing  the  will  of  God?  If  sin 
exists  contrary  to  the  will  of  God,  why  not  put 
an  end  to  it  at  once,  since,  according  to  Univer- 
salism,  he  intends  to  put  an  end  to  it  at  some  time  ? 
If  God  is  immutable,  then  all  his  attributes  are 
just  as  much  in  favor  of  the  complete  overthrow 
of  sin  now  as  they  ever  will  be.  The  immutable, 
holy,  and  benevolent  God  speaks  to  a  lost  and 
ruined  race  in  words  that  ought  to  move  all  hearts. 
"  Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way,  and  the  unright- 
eous man  his  thoughts :  and  let  him  return  unto 
the  Lord,  and  he  will  have  mercy  upon  him ;  and 
to  our  God,  for  he  will  abundantly  pardon."  To 
this  all  the  attributes  of  the  Deity  say,  Amen. 


202  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE    SECOND    COMING    OF    CHRIST. 

There  are  no  two  subjects  of  more  solemn  im- 
portance to  the  children  of  men  than  the  second 
coming  of  Christ,  and  the  end  of  the  world. 
TJniversalist  authors  do  not  deny  that  Christ's 
coming  is  in  the  future;  but  they  do  most  em- 
phatically deny  the  orthodox  view  of  his  second 
coming,  and  the  judgment  in  connection  with  his 
coming.  They  hold  that  nearly  all  of  those  script- 
ures which  speak  of  the  coming  of  Christ  have 
reference  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem _,  his  com- 
ing in  spirit,  etc. 

Before  producing  any  scripture  proof  on  this 
momentous  subject,  it  will  be  proper  to  state  the 
views  of  TJniversalist  authors.  On  page  210  Mr, 
Guild  says,  ^'The  first  appearance  of  Christ  in  this 
world,  so  far  as  we  have  any  knowledge,  was  his 
appearance  in  the  flesh,  as  an  infant  of  days."  "  The 
second  appearance  must  have  been  in  spirit  and  in 
power  to  the  overthrow  of  his  enemies,  the  destruc- 
tion of  their  city,  and  the  final  close  of  legal  rites 
and   ceremonies."      On   page   212  he    says,  "The 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  203 

object  of  tliifc^  (third)  coining  appears  to  be  to  raise 
the  dead  to  a  state  of  incorruption,  immortality, 
and  glory."  Mr.  Thayer,  page  255,  says,  "The 
gospel-day,  or  the  period  of  Christ's  reign,  is  the 
judgment-day  in  which  every  one  is  rewarded 
according  to  what  he  does,  whether  good  or  bad." 
Mr.  Thayer  denies  a  future  general  judgment,  and 
connects  the  final  (or  third)  coming  of  Christ  with 
the  resurrection  of  the  body.  In  Heb.  ix.  28  Paul 
says,  "  Unto  them  that  look  for  him  [Christ]  shall 
he  appear  the  second  time  without  sin  unto  salva- 
tion." There  is  not  a  sentence  in  God's  book  that 
says  anything  about  the  tliird  coming  of  Christ. 
This  is  purely  a  Universalist  idea.  They  hold  that 
all  those  passages  in  the  Old  and-ISTew  Testament 
usually  applied  to  the  last  (second)  coming  of 
Christ  refer  to  his  appeai-ance  "in  spirit  and 
power  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem."  They 
hold  that  the  gospel-day  is  the  day  of  judgment, 
and  in  the  resurrection  all  will  be  raised  to  glory 
and  inmiortality. 

The  first  scriptures  we  shall  examine  are  in  Mat- 
thew, twenty-fourth  and  twenty-fifth  chapters.  In 
Matt.  xxiv.  3,  the  disciples  ask  the  Savior  three 
questions :  "  Tell  us,  when  shall  these  things  be  ? 
and  what  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming,  and  of 
the  end  of  the  world  ? "  Jesus  had  just  gone  away 
from  the  temple,  and  the  disciples  came  to  him 


104  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

and  called  his  attention  to  the  buildings.  The 
Savior  informed  them  that  the  time  would  come 
when  there  should  not  be  left  one  stone  upon  an- 
other. Hearing  this,  the  disciples  asked  the  ques- 
tions referred  to.  The  Savior,  without  fixing  the 
day  and  hour  when  these  things  should  be,  pro- 
ceeded to  answer  the  second  question  by  giving 
them  the  unmistakable  signs  that  should  precede 
that  event.  And  to  fix  it  more  indelibly  on  their 
minde,  he  illustrates  it  by  parables.  He  continues 
thus  discoursing  on  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
till  near  the  close  of  chapter  xxv.,  when  he  sud- 
denly changes  the  style  of  his  discourse,  and  an- 
swers the  third  question — the  end  of  the  world. 
]N"early  all  of  the  Savior's  discourse  from  the 
second  verse  of  the  twenty -fourth  chapter  to  the 
thirty- first  verse  of  the  twenty -fifth  chapter, 
bears  directly  upon  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
Much  of  it,  however,  may  be  applied  to  the  last 
great  coming  of  Christ,  because  there  is  in  many 
respects  a  similarity.  As  there  was  a  simi- 
larity between  the  last  days  of  the  old  world  in 
the  time  of  Noah  and  the  last  days  of  the  inhabit- 
ants of  Jerusalem,  so  there  is  a  similarity  between 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  end  of  the 
world.  All  that  was  spoken  concerning  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  has  been  literally  fulfilled ; 
and  as  certainly  as  that  has  been  fulfilled,  so  cer- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  205 

tainly  will  the  other  be  fulfilled.  Christ  will  come 
again. 

We  will  commence  at  the  31st  verse.  ^'Wlien 
the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and  all 
the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon 
the  throne  of  his  glory :  and  before  him  shall  be 
gathered  all  nations."  'Now  consider  :  Christ  shall 
come,  and  all  the  holj/  angels  ivith  him,.  Did  this,  or 
anything  like  it,  occur  at  the  time  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem?  Mr.  Guild,  on  pages  231  and 
232,  says  that  the  holy  angels  that  were  to  accom- 
pany Christ  in  this  coming  were  the  Romans.  It 
would  be  difficult  to  conceive  of  a  more  absurd 
idea.  There  perhaps  never  lived  a  more  corrupt 
and  wicked  class  of  men  than  the  Roman  soldiers ; 
yet  these  are  Christ's  holy  angels.  Mr.  Guild,  in 
order  to  cover  up  the  absurdity  of  this  theory,  says, 
page  232,  "They  [angels]  are  sometimes  called 
holy,  not  because  they  are  so  of  themselves,  but 
because  they  execute  God's  holy  command."  But 
in  this  passage  the  term  holy  is  not  applied  to  the 
work  they  were  to  perform,  but  to  their  character. 
''The  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  and  all 
the  holy  angels  with  him."  That  is,  if  Universal- 
ism  be  true,  Titus,  the  Roman  general,  shall  come, 
and  all  his  holy  Roman  soldiers  with  him.  Beau- 
tiful angels  were  they!    But  this  is    Universalism. 

Again;    it   is   declared   that   Christ  shall    "sit 


206  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

upon  the  throne  of  his  glory :  and  before  him  shall 
be  gathered  all  nations."  Did  this  or  anything 
like  it  occur  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem? 
Was  there  any  such  gathering  of  nations  ?  There 
was  nothing  connected  with  the  destruction  of  Je- 
rusalem from  first  to  last  that  will  answer  to  this 
description.  The  Jews  were  scattered,  but  the 
nations  were  not  gathered  together. 

It  is  further  stated  in  this  connection,  verse  32, 
that  he  (Christ)  "shall  separate  one  from  another, 
as  a  shepherd  divideth  his  sheep  from  the  goats." 
Did  this  or  anything  like  it  occur  at  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  ?  Were  the  nations  separated  V 
The  Jews  were  scattered  among  all  nations,  but 
there  was  no  such  thing  as  a  separation  of  nations, 
nor  of  individuals. 

Again :  the  Savior  says  in  verse  34  that  those  on 
his  right  hand  are  to  inherit  the  kingdom,  and  in 
verse  46  that  they  are  to  have  eternal  life.  Into 
what  kingdom  did  the  righteous,  whom  the  Savior 
calls  the  ''blessed  of  his  Father,"  enter  at  the 
time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem?  They  were 
to  inherit  a  kingdom.  Who  ?  The  Jews,  or  the 
Roman  soldiers?  Who  have  the  right  to  an  in- 
heritance? Is  it  for  any  but  the  children  of  the 
family?  Who  are  the  children  of  the  family? 
Let  Paul  answer.  "  If  a  son,  then  an  heir  of  God 
through  Christ."     (Galatians  iv.  7.)     "If  children, 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  207 

then  heirs;  heirs  of  God,  and  joint-heirs  with 
Christ."  (Romans  viii.  17.)  The  inheritance  is 
for  the  heirs,  and  the  heirs  are  the  children  of 
God.  This  kingdom  was  prepared  for  them. 
There  was  nothing  connected  with  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  from  first  to  last,  that  will  answer 
to  this  description.  ITothing  has  occurred  since 
the  world  began,  to  which  this  can  be  applied 
with  any  degree  of  propriety. 

Finally,  it  is  declared  that,  after  the  separation 
spoken  of  in  verse  33,  the  wicked — those  on  his 
left  hand — should  go  away  into  everlasting  pun- 
ishment. E'ow  if  these  things  did  not  occur  at  the 
time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  they  are  yet 
to  come  to  pass.  I  have  read  the  history  of  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  but  I  found  nothing  that 
will  answer  to  this  description.  The  plain  mean- 
ing of  the  passage  is  this.  (1.)  Christ  will  come 
again,  and  all  his  holy  angels  with  him.  (2.) 
When  he  comes,  at  the  end  of  the  world,  all 
nations  shall  be  gathered  before  him.  (3.)  When 
he  comes,  and  all  nations  are  gathered  before 
him,  he  shall  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory, 
and  all  nations,  and  each  individual,  shall  be 
judged;  and  he  shall  separate  between  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked.  (4.)  Immediately 
following  this  separation  the  final  sentence 
shall  be  passed:      "These   shall   go    away    into 


/ 


208  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

everlasting  punishment,  but  tlie  righteous  into  life 
eternal." 

Having  shown  that  this  important  passage 
points  to  and  forcibly  describes  the  second  com- 
ing of  Christ  and  a  future  general  judgment,  it 
will  be  proper  to  consider  other  passages  that  bear 
directly  upon  the  same  point. 

"Ye  men  of  Galilee,  why  stand  ye  gazing  up 
into  heaven  ?  this  same  Jesus,  which  is  taken  up 
from  you  into  heaven,  shall  so  come  in  like  man- 
ner as  ye  have  seen  him  go  into  heaven/'  (Acts 
i.  H.)  This  settles  the  question  beyond  all  con- 
troversy, that  Christ  will  come  again  in  person. 
If  his  ascension  up  into  heaven  was  personal,  so 
will  his  coming  be.  He  shall  "  come  in  like  man- 
ner as  ye  have  seen  him  go  into  heaven."  Christ 
went  to  heaven  clothed  in  human  nature,  and  with 
the  same  body  shall  he  descend  again.  He  shall  so 
come  in  like  manner. 

Having  fixed  in  the  mind  the  solemn  fact  that 
Christ  will  come  again  in  person,  it  will  be  proper 
to  examine  a  few  more  passages  which  describe 
the  nature  of  his  coming,  and  what  is  to  occur 
in  connection  with  it. 

''And  to  you  who  are  troubled  rest  with  us, 
when  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from 
heaven  with  his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire 
taking  vengeance  on  them  that  know  not  God, 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  209 

and  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ:  who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting 
destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and 
from  the  glory  of  his  power;  when  he  shall  come 
to  be  glorified  in  his  saints,  and  to  be  admired  in 
all  them  that  believe  (because  our  testimony 
among  you  was  believed)  in  that  day."  (II. 
Thessalonians  i.  7-10.)  The  description  given 
by  the  apostle  in  this  text,  of  the  coming  of  Christ, 
is  very  similar  to  Christ's  own  description, 
given  in  Matthew  xxv.  31-46.  The  Lord 
Jesus  is  to  be  revealed  from  heaven  with  his 
mighty  angels.  In  Matthew  it  is  said  he 
shall  come,  and  all  his  holy  angels  with 
him.  Here  it  is  said  that  the  wicked  are  to 
be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction.  In 
Matthew  they  are  to  go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment.  Did  anything  answering  to  this 
description  occur  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ? 
Three  facts  are  clearly  stated  in  this  text.  (1.) 
Christ  shall  come  again.  (2.)  The  manner  of  his 
coming  is  described.  (3.)  What  is  to  occur  in 
connection  with  that  coming  is  stated.  ITow  if 
these  things  did  not  occur  at  the  time  of  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  they  are  yet  in  the  future. 
Who  were  the  saints  that  glorified  him,  and  w)io 
were  the  believers  that  admired  him  at  the  time 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed?     Who  were  punished 

14 


210  UNIVERSAL  RESTOBATION 

with  everlasting  destruction  at  that  time?  Mr. 
Guild  sajs  that  the  holy  angels  referred  to  in 
Matthew  xxv.  31-2  were  the  Romans;  then  if 
this  reference  to  the  coming  of  Christ  relates  to 
the  same  event,  the  "mighty  angels"  must  mean 
the  Roman  soldiers.  There  is  still  another  dif- 
ficulty. The  text  declares  that  the  "Lord  Jesus 
shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with  his  mighty 
angels."  Titus  and  his  soldiers  came  from  Rome. 
ISome  difference  between  coming  from  Borne  and 
coming  from  heaven.  "Rome,  for  idolatry  and 
wickedness  of  every  description,  was  the 
metropolis  of  the  world."  Heaven  is  pure 
and  spotless.  That  an  inspired  man  of 
God  should  have  represented  the  coming  of 
Titus  and  his  army  from  Rome,  to  destroy 
Jerusalem,  as  being  similar  to  the  coming  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  from  heaven  with  his  mighty  angels, 
is  not  for  a  moment  to  be  supposed. 

It  should  be  remembered,  also,  that  Thessalonica 
was  not  inhabited  by  Jews,  but  principally  by 
devout  Greeks  and  converted  heathens — persons 
that  were  not  personally  interested  in  the  fate  of 
that  city.  Besides,  they  were  too  remote  from 
Jerusalem  to  be  materially  affected  by  its  fall. 
Thessalonica  was  a  city  in  Europe,  nearly  a 
thousand  miles  distant  from  Jerusalem.  It  is 
eimjDly   foolishness    to   suppose   that   the   apostle 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  211 

would  have  appealed  to  their  hopes  and  fears  based 
"upon  the  fall  of  that  city,  a  thousand  miles  away. 
]^o,  Paul  was  describing  another  event  altogether — 
one  in  which  they,  with  all  other  Christians,  were 
deeply  and  personally  interested. 

The  Scriptures  abound  with  reference  to  the  com- 
ing of  Christ,  both  as  to  the  fact  and  manner  of 
his  coming.  He  "  shall  come  in  his  glory, 
and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him."  (Matt. 
XXV.  31.)  He  shall  come  "with  ten  thousand 
of  his  saints."  (Jude  14.)  He  shall  come  "  in 
the  clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and  great  glory." 
(Matt.  xxiv.  30.)  He  shall  come  "  with  his  mighty 
angels."  (II.  Thess.  i.  7,  8.)  He  shall  come  "  with 
clouds ;  and  every  eye  shall  see  him."  (Rev.  i.  7.) 
He  shall  come  "  as  a  thief  in  the  night."  (I.  Thessa- 
lonians  v.  2,  3.)  He  shall  come  "  with  a  shout,  with 
the  voice  of  the  archangel."  (I.  Thessalonians 
iv.  16.)  He  shall  come  to  "judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead."  (II.  Timothy  iv.  1.)  He  shall  "  come 
to  be  glorified  in  his  saints."  (II.  Thessalonians 
i.  10.)  All  these  things  are  to  occur  when  he 
comes. 

In  further  confirmation  of  the  truth  afiirmed 
in  this  chapter,  we  will  examine  I.  Thessalonians 
iv.  16.  "The  Lord  himself  shall  descend  frorn 
heaven  with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  arch- 
angel, and  with  the  trump  of  God :  and  the  dead  in 


212  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

Christ  shall  rise  first."  This  passage  was  written 
by  the  same  person  and  directed  to  the  same 
church  that  II.  Thessalonians  i.  7-10  was.  From 
the  style  of  language  employed  it  is  evident  that 
the  same  event  Avas  in  the  mind  of  the  apostle.  In 
the  former  passage  Paul  says,  "The  Lord  Jesus 
shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  w^ith  his  mighty 
angels  in  flaming  iire."  This,  as  has  been  shown, 
can  not  refer  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  for 
nothing  to  which  this  description  will  answer  oc- 
curred at  that  time.  In  the  passage  now  undei 
review  the  apostle  connects  the  coming  of  Christ 
with  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  It  will  not,  I 
presume,  be  denied  that  I.  Corinthians  xv.  refers  to 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  In  this  chapter,  verse 
52,  Paul  speaks  of  the  sounding  of  the  trumpet: 
"The  trumpet  shall  sound,  and  the  dead  shall  be 
raised."  This  undoubtedly  refers  to  a  general 
resurrection.  ]^ow  observe  the  points  of  resem- 
blance between  the  two  passages ;  and  remember 
that  they  were  written  by  the  same  person,  to  the 
same  church.  In  one  text  it  is  declared  that  "  the 
Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven;"  in  the 
other,  "the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from 
heaven."  Again :  one  says  "  he  shall  descend  with 
the  voice  of  the  archangel,"  and  the  other  says 
"he  shall  be  revealed  with  his  mighty  angels." 
Now  compare  this  with  the  language  of  Christ,  in 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  213 

Matthew  xxv,  "  The  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his 
glory,  and  all  his  holy  augels  with  him/'  "All 
nations  shall  be  gathered  before  him." 

In  reviewing  these  passages,  there  are  several 
points  of  inquiry  that  force  themselves  upon  the 
mind.  (1.)  If  Christ  intended  to  tea-ch  that  he 
would  come  again  in  the  manner  and  for  the  pur- 
pose claimed  in  this  chapter,  in  what  language 
could  he  have  taught  it  more  clearly  and  forcibly? 
(2.)  If  he  did  not  intend  to  teach  that  truth,  what 
could  have  induced  him  to  employ  such  language 
as  he  did,  when  he  must  have  known  that  the  vast 
majority  of  Bible  students  would  so  understand  it? 
(3.)  If  the  apostles  did  not  so  understand  the 
teachings  of  Christ,  how  shall  we  account  for  the 
language  they  employed  ?  (4.)  It  is  a  fact  that 
the  great  majority  of  Christians,  from- the  days  of 
Christ  and  the  apostles  down  to  to  this  present 
time,  have  believed  and  taught  that  Jesus  Christ 
would  come  a  second  time;  and  at  his  second 
coming  he  would  judge  the  world.  (5.)  It  is  a 
fact  that  this  doctrine  is  not  taught  in  any  confes- 
sion of  faith  more  plainly  than  it  was  taught  by 
Christ  and  his  apostles.  Men  who  have  read  the 
Bible  through  on  their  knees,  and  devoutly  prayed 
for  light  to  shine  on  the  sacred  page,  have  risen 
from  their  investigations  fully  convinced  that  the 
Scriptures    teach    that    Jesus    Christ    will   come 


214  UNIVERSAL  KESTORATION 

again  to  judge  the  world.  The  Christian  fathers, 
those  who  lived  immediately  after  the  days  of  the 
apostles,  very  generally  believed  in  the  second 
coming  of  Christ  to  judge  the  world.  But  Mr. 
Guild,  on  page  356,  says,  "The  opinion  of  these 
men  on  any  important  point  is  not  deserving  of 
any  great  weight."  He  makes  short  work  of  the 
opinions  of  such  men  as  Justin  Martyr,  Irenseus, 
Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Tertullian,  Origen,  Cyp- 
rian, Gregory,  &c.  Why  ?  Because  they  did 
not  teach  modern  Universalism.  But  it  should 
be  remembered  that  Universalist  authors,  when 
they  want  to  prove  the  antiquity  of  their  doctrine, 
go  right  back  to  Origen,  and  a  few  others  who 
held  to  some  sort  of  restorationism.  They  are 
good  authority  when  their  opinions  can  be  pressed 
into  the  service  of  modern  Universalism ;  but 
when  this  can  not  be  done  their  opinions  are  of  no 
weight. 

According  to  the  teachings  of  TJiiiversalist 
authors,  nearly  all  of  the  ITew  Testament  was 
written  expressly  for  the  Jews,  and  very  much  of 
it  referred  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Any 
and  every  passage  that  seems  to  connect  judgment 
or  punishment  with  the  coming  of  Christ,  must  be 
applied  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Paul 
wrote  a  letter  to  the  Christians  of  Thessalonica, — 
a  to^^  n  about  a  thousand  miles  away  from  Jerusa- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  215 

lem, — and  told  tliem  that  the  Lord  Jesus  should 
be  revealed  from  heaven  v^ith  his  mighty  angels ; 
that  he  would  take  vengeance  on  them  that  did 
not  obey  the  gospel  of  Christ;  that  his  saints 
would  glorify  him.  All  this  is  made  to  refer  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Jesus  said  he  would 
come,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  and  all 
nations  would  be  gathered  before  him.  This,  too, 
must  refer  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Now, 
the  fact  is,  there  is  no  more  similarity  between 
these  descriptions  of  Christ's  coming  and  the  his- 
tory of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  than  there 
is  between  day  and  night. 

The  scriptures  employed  in  this  chapter  teach,  as 
plainly  as  language  can  teach  any  truth:  (1.)  That 
the  coming  of  Christ,  denominated  by  Paul  in 
Hebrews  ix.  28  as  his  second  coming,  is  yet  in  the 
future.  (2.)  When  he  comes  the  second  time, 
without  sin  unto  salvation,  the  dead  shall  be 
raised,  and  all  nations  shall  be  gathered  before 
him;  or,  as  John,  in  Revelation  xx.  12,'says,  ''I 
saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand  before  Grod." 
(3.)  There  will  be  a  separation  between  the  right- 
eous and  the  wicked;  and  this  is  to  occur  when 
the  Son  of  man  cometh  with  all  his  holy  angels. 
Mark  the  language.  When  he  comes,  as  described 
by  himself  and  the  apostle,  he  is  to  be  glorified  in 
his  saints  and  admired  in  all  that  believe,  while 


216  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

those  wlio  obey  not  the  gospel  are  to  be  punished 
with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of 
the  Lord  and  the  glory  of  his  power;  or,  as  the 
Savior  expresses  it,  "These  shall  go  away  into 
everlasting  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life 
eternal."  ISiow  if  these  things  did  not  occur  at 
the  time  and  in  connection  with  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  they  are  yet  in  the  future.  And  1 
once  more  affirm  that  there  was  nothing  connected 
with  the  fall  of  that  city  that  will  answer  to  this 
description ;  and  I  further  affirm  that  nothing  has 
occurred  since  the  world  began  that  will  answer  to 
that  description. 

It  will  be  important  to  notice  that  this  second 
coming  of  Christ  is  to  be  literal.  "This  same 
Jesus,  which  is  taken  up  from  you  into  heaven, 
shall  so  come  in  like  manner  as  ye  have  seen  him 
go  into  heaven."  Did  he  so  come  in  like  manner 
at  the  time  Jerusalem  was  destroyed?  He  did 
not.  Did  he  so  come  in  like  manner,  in  spirit,  in 
the  kingdom  of  grace?  He  did  not.  Then  that 
literal  coming  must  yet  be  in  the  future.  "The 
Lord  HIMSELF  shall  descend  from  heaven."  " Him- 
self y'^  not  another;  not  in  the  person  of  another, 
but  himself.  Christ  did  appear  on  earth  literal  ly, 
and  "  to  them  that  look  for  him  shall  he  appear 
the  second  time.'*  If  his  first  coming  was  literal 
so  will  his  second  coming  be.    "Not  a  word  is  said 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  217 

about  his  third  coming.  Universalists  talk  about 
the  third  coming  of  Christ,  but  the  Bible  knows 
nothing  about  it. 


X 


218  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

A   DISTmCTION    OF    CHARACTER   IN   THE   RESURRECTION. 

Haviiii^  demonstrated  in  the  preceding  chapter 
the  fact  that  the  second  coming  of  Christ  is  yet  in 
the  future,  it  will  be  in  order,  in  this  chapter,  to 
show  that  there  will  not  only  be  a  general  resur- 
rection in  connection  with  that  coming,  but 
also  a  distinction  of  character  and  final  separation 
between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked. 

Before  adducing  any  scripture  argument,  it  will 
be  proper  to  state  the  views  of  Universalist  au- 
thors touching  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection. 
On  page  210  Mr.  Thayer  says,  "  The  resurrection  is 
a  moral  and  spiritual  change — the  anastasis  or 
raising  up  of  the  soul."  On  page  211  he  says, 
*'But  it  seems  obvious  that  the  language  quoted 
(I.  Corinthians,  xv.)  has  to  do  with  more  than  the 
body ;  that  it  takes  in  the  anastasis^  or  upraising, 
into  a  higher  life  of  the  whole  being."  On  page 
219  he  says,  "  Of  course,  *  *  *  the  resurrec- 
tion has  to  do  with  more  than  the  body."     On 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  219 

page  224  he  says,  "  All  the  dead  will  be  holy  in 
the  resurrection."  On  page  231  he  says,  "And 
through  this  resurrection  change,  this  uplifting 
into  the  image  of  God,  all  must  pass  alike,  differ- 
ing only  in  degrees;  saint  and  sinner,  believer  and 
unbeliever,  Christian  and  pagan."  On  page  233 
he  says,  "We  have  already  indicated,  with  suf- 
ficient clearness  for  the  intelligent  reader,  the 
spiritual  characters  of  the  agencies  and  processes 
by  which  the  soul  is  to  be  raised  up  and  redeemed 
in  the  resurrection." 

If  it  were  necessary  we  could  extend  these 
quotations  much  further.  But  these  will  suffice  to 
show  the  exact  views  of  Universalist  authors. 
(1.)  They  teach  that  the  resurrection  means  more 
than  the  resurrection  of  the  body — it  means  the 
resurrection  of  the  soul.  (2.)  That  all  will  need 
a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection.  (3.)  That 
all  will  be  made  holy  in  the  resurrection. 

The  resurrection  means  more  than  the  resurrection 
of  the  body.  It  is  a  moral  and  spiritual  change 
— it  means  the  raising  up  of  the  soul.  This  would 
most  certainly  imply  that  the  soul  dies  with  the 
body.  Elsewhere  this  same  author  teaches  that 
the  soul  does  not  die  with  the  body.  On  page  234-5 
he  says,  "The  Savior  never  abandons  the  soul. 
He  follows  it  in  this  world  and  into  all  the  worlds 
beyondy    *     *     *     till  it  is  found  and  restored." 


220  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

On  page  229  he  says,  "Christ  saves  men  after 
death  by  the  same  means  and  in  the  same  way  as 
before  death."  I  shall  not  pretend  to  harmonize 
these  statements,  I  only  give  them  to  show  how 
flatly  Universalism  contradicts  itself. 

The  particular  point  to  settle  in  this  connection 
is  whether  the  resurrection  implies  and  includes 
anything  more  than  the  resurrection  of  the  body. 
"Webster  defines  the  word  resurrection  thus.  It 
comes  from  two  words,  re-again,  and  surgere,  to 
rise, — to  rise  again.  "When  applied  to  the  dead, 
it  can  only  mean  the  living  again  of  that  which 
died.  Nothing  more  will  be  raised  up  than  went 
down.  Kow,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  the  soul 
is  mortal  and  dies  with  the  body,  it  can  never  be 
established  that  the  resurrection  means  more  than 
the  raising  up  of  the  body.  ITothing  will  be  raised 
up  but  that  which  went  down.  It  is  difficult  to 
tell  just  what  Universalist  authors  do  teach.  As 
has  been  shown,  they  claim  that  the  resurrection 
means  the  raising  up  of  the  soul ;  and  as  has  also 
been  shown,  they  teach  that  Christ  follows  the 
soul  after  death  until  it  is  found  and  restored. 
Both  these  theories  can  not  be  true. 

All  will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection. 
This  they  boldly  affirm.  Mr.  G  uild,  page  334,  says, 
"  Natural  death  is  the  result  of  a  mortal  consti- 
tution, which  every  man  has.     Moral  death  is  the 


CAllEFULLY   EXAMINED.  221 

result  of  sill,  which  every  man  commits.  "Well,  as 
in  the  earthy  man  (Adam)  all  die  physically  and 
morally,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive 
physically  and  morally.  *  *  *  The  change  to 
be  effected  by  the  resurrection  is  something  more 
than  a  mere  physical  change."  Mr.  Thayer,  on 
pages  218  and  219,  teaches  that  the  resurrection  is  a 
moral  and  spiritual  change.  This  leads  to  the  in- 
quiry whether  the  resurrection  is  to  be  effected  by 
the  exertion  of  physical  or  of  moral  power,  i^ow,  I 
affirm  that  the  resurrection  of  the  body  will  be 
effected  by  the  mere  physical  power  of  God.  An- 
other question.  Can  the  exertion  of  such  power 
change  tho  moral  nature  of  the  soul?  Holiness 
implies  love  to  God  and  man;  ''it  belongs  exclu- 
sively to  the  affections  of  the  mind;"  and  the  ex- 
ertion of  physical  power  over  the  body  can  never 
produce  such  a  change.  "  There  is  no  principle 
either  of  philosophy  or  theology  upon  which  such 
a  doctrine  can  be  based."  There  is  only  one  basis 
upon  which  such  a  doctrine  can  rest,  and  that  is, 
that  the  soul  is  mortal  and  dies  with  the  body. 
ISTothing  will  be  raised  up  in  the  resurrection  but 
that  which  dies,  and  nothing  will  be  changed  by 
the  resurrection  but  that  which  is  raised  up.  Paul 
speaks  of  raising  up  the  body;  the  mortal  of 
putting  on  immortality;  the  corrupt  of  putting 
on  the  incorruptible;  of  changing  the  vile  body; 


222  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

but  nowhere  is  it  said,  or  even  intimated,  that 
anything  more  than  the  body  will  be  raised  up 
and  changed. 

Another  curious  fact  is  that  Mr.  Thayer,  on 
page  231,  declares  that  all,  saint  and  sinner,  the 
believer  and  the  unbeliever,  must  pass  through  this 
resurrection  change  alike.  A  Christian  in  the 
resurrection  will  be  no  better  than  an  infidel  or 
atheist.  Whether  a  man  dies  in  Christ  or  dies  in 
sin,  there  will  be  no  difference.  It  would  certainly 
be  interesting  to  know  something  about  the  con- 
dition of  the  soul  between  the  death  and  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body.  If  all  will  need  a  spiritual 
change  in  the  resurrection;  if  saint  and  sinner, 
believer  and  unbeliever,  must  pass  alike  through 
this  change,  then  no  soul  is  fit  to  enter  heaven,  and 
will  not  be  until  the  resurrection.  Where,  then,  is 
the  soul?  It  is  not  and  can  not  be  in  heaven,  for 
it  is  not  yet  fitted  for  that  place;  it  can  not  be  in 
hell,  for  Universalists  say  there  is  no  such  place. 
Perhaps  Mr.  Thayer  can  answer  this  question. 
On  pages  234  and  235  he  says,  "  The  Savior  never 
abandons  the  soul.  *  *  ^  He  follows  it  in  this 
world  and  into  all  worlds  beyond,  as  a  Guide,  and 
Teacher,  and  Redeemer,  till  it  is  found  and  restored." 
Here,  then,  we  have  the  answer :  the  Savior  is  after 
the  soul,  chasing  it  from  one  world  to  another,  and 
will  keep  on  chasinej  it  until  it  is  found  and  re- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  223 

stored.  But  suppose  the  Savior  should  happen  to 
come  up  to  one  of  these  souls,  what  would  he  do 
with  it?  He  could  not  restore  it  till  the  resurrec- 
tion— for  all  must  pass  alike  through  this  resurrec- 
tion. 

We  will  now  take  up  the  third  proposition, 
which  is  this,  All  mankind  will  be  made  holy 
in  the  resurrection.  In  opposition  to  this  theory 
we  have  stated,  and  shall  aim  to  prove,  that  there 
will  be  a  distinction  of  moral  character  in  the 
resurrection.  To  settle  this  important  and  solemn 
question,  we  shall  appeal  directly  to  the  word  of 
God.  It  will  not  be  necessary  to  examine  all  the 
passages  that  bear  on  this  question,  only  a  few  of 
the  principal  ones. 

"  And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of 
the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and 
some  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt." 
(Daniel  xii.  2.)  Mr.  Thayer,  on  pages 
334  and  335,  refers  this  passage  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  at  which  time  the 
old  dispensation  of  the  law  should  be  abol- 
ished. Mr.  Guild,  pages  118  and  120,  refers  it  to 
the  same  thing.  Mr.  Balfour  substantially  teaches 
the  same  theory.  Of  course,  every  passage  in  the 
Old  and  New  Testament  that  seems  to  teach  the 
idea  of  judgment  in  the  future  must  refer  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.     Sleeping  in  the  dust, 


224  UNIVERSAL    IIESTOIIATIOISI 

according  to  these  divines,  means  only  sjnritual 
sloth,  indifferencey  ignorance^  and  unbelief.  Then 
those  who  sleep  in  the  dust  of  sloth,  ignorance, 
and  unbelief  are  to  come  forth.  What  to  ?  "  To 
shame  and  everlasting  contempt."  Did  anything 
like  this  occur  at  the  time  of  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem?  Who  came  forth  at  that  time  to 
shame  and  contempt?  And  who  came  forth  to 
everlasting  life  ?  Mark  the  language.  It  was  not 
only  those  who  came  forth  to  everlasting  shame 
and  contempt,  that  had  been  sleeping  in  the  dust, 
but  all  who  came  forth  had  been  sleeping  there. 
Hence  it  will  not  do  to  say  that  sleeping  in  the 
dust  of  the  earth  means  ignorance  and  unbelief. 
They  all  came  forth  from  that  state  or  condition, 
— some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame  and 
everlasting  contempt.  It  is  not  possible  to  con- 
cieve  how  those  who  were  sleeping  in  the'  dust 
of  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin  should  come  forth 
from  that  state  of  spiritual  death  to  shame  and 
contempt. 

But  it  is  objected  that  this  text  should  be  appli- 
ed to  a  future  general  judgment,  because  Daniel 
says,  "many  that  sleep  in  the  dust  shall  come 
forth."  But  this  word  many  is  used  in  other 
passages  to  mean  all.  "  The  Son  of  man  is  come 
to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  manyJ^  (Matthew 
XX.  28.)     For  how  many  ?    Paul  says  that  Christ 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  225 


gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all.'^  (I.  Timoth}' 
ii.  6.)  But  no  doubt  there  was  in  the  mind  of 
Daniel  a  better  reason  for  using  the  word  many. 
*'A11  do  not  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth,  and 
will  not  at  the  time  of  Christ's  second  coming, 
and  the  prophet  had  his  eye  fixed  upon  a  world 
full  of  living  inhabitants  who  will  not  be  raised 
but  changed,  and  applied  the  word  many  to  all 
the  dead  to  distinguish  them  from  the  living." 

This  text  can  not  be  explained  to  mean  a  first 
resurrection,  because  there  is  such  a  manifest  dis- 
tinction of  character.  It  can  not  mean  a  moral 
or  spiritual  resurrection  for  the  very  same  reason. 
It  must  therefore  be  explained  to  mean  a  future, 
general  resurrection.  The  context  and  concluding 
verse  of  the  chapter  confirm  this  view,  "And 
they  that  be  wise  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of 
the  firmament;  and  they  that  turn  many  to  right- 
eousness, as  the  stars  forever  and  ever."  Add  to 
this  the  last  verse,  which  is  addressed  to  Daniel : 
"  But  go  jthou  thy  way  till  the  end  be;  for  thou 
shalt  rest  and  stand  in  thy  lot  at  the  end  of  the 
days."  This  proves  that  the  resurrection  spoken 
of  in  the  second  verse  was  to  be  literal,  and  was 
yet  in  the  future,  and  that  Daniel  was  to  be  pres- 
ent and  stand  in  his  lot.  When  ?  "  At  th-e  erid  of 
the  days^  Was  Daniel  present,  and  did  he  stand 
in  his  lot  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ?     In  this 

15 


226  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

text  we  have  positive  proof  that  there  will  be  a 
distinction  of  character  in  the  resurrection. 

"  But  when  thou  makest  a  feast,  call  the  poor, 
the  maimed,  the  lame,  the  blind :  and  thou  shalt 
be  blessed;  for  they  can  not  recompense  thee:  for 
thou  shalt  be  recompensed  at  the  resurrection  of  the 
just."  (Luke  xiv.  13,  14.)  Two  facts  are  clearly 
set  forth  in  this  passage.  (1.)  The  resurrection  was 
yet  in  the  future.  (2.)  There  would  be  two 
classes  in  the  resurrection.  The '^  resurrection  of 
the  just"  most  certainly  implies  that  some  will 
not  be  considered  just.  If  all  are  to  be  raised 
alike,  it  would  have  been  enough  if  the  Savior  had 
said,  ''Thou  shalt  be  recompensed  at  the  resurrec- 
tion." Why  add  "o/  the  just"  if  all  are  to  fare 
alike?  To  confirm  this  opinion,  we  will  take  the 
language  of  Paul,  "And  have  hope  toward  God, 
which  they  themselves  also  allow,  that  there  shall 
be  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  both  of  the  just  and 
unjust"  (Acts  xxiv.  15.)  Here  is  a  most  positive 
declaration  that  the  apostle  believed  in  the  resur- 
rection ;    that    in   this    respect    he  differed  not  a 

whit  from  the  Pharisees.  He  believed  there 
would  be  a  resurrection, — not  lias  been,   not  now 

S^oing  on,  but  '-''shall  he" — and  that  this  resurrec- 
tion 19  to  be  general,  "a  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
both  of  the  just  and  unjust."  Here  are  two 
characters,  just   and  unjust.     Now  if    all  are   to 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  227 

be  made  holy  in  the  resurrection,  why  this  dis- 
tinction of  character?  But  Universalists  say  that 
the  apostle  would  have  been  cruel  to  hope  for  the 
resurrection  of  the  unjust.  Paul  hoped  for  the 
resurrection  not  because  the  unjust  would  be 
raised,  but  notwithstanding  their  resurrection.  We 
hope  for  the  spread  of  the  gospel  of  truth,  not 
because  wicked  men  who  reject  it  will  be  con- 
demned, but  notwithstanding  their  condemnation. 
The  idea  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  is  in  it- 
self a  most  glorious  doctrine. 

"  The  dead  in  Christ  shall  arise  first."  (I.  Thes- 
salonians  iv.  13-17.)  In  these  verses,  only  a  part 
of  which  is  here  quoted,  we  have  the  fact  stated 
that  "the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from 
heaven,"  that  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  be  raised 
first,  and  the  living  changed.  The  apostle  affirms 
that  those  who  are  alive  at  the  time  of  Christ's 
coming  shall  not  prevent  (go  before)  them  which 
are  asleep.  By  those  which  are  asleep  the  dead 
are  meant.  The  point  most  important  to  con- 
sider in  this  connection  is  what  the  apostle  meant 
by  the  dead  in  Christ,  and  their  rising  first. 
John  says,  "  I  heard  a  voice  from  heaven  saying 
unto  me,  Write,  Blessed  are  the  dead  which  die  in 
the  Lord."  (Rev.  xiv.  13.)  Who  are  those  that 
die  in  the  Lord?  Are  they  not  such,  and  such 
only,  as  live  in  the  Lord?     Will  such  as  live  out 


228  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

of  Christ  die  in  Christ?  One  of  two  things  must 
be  true :  either  all  men  live  in  Christ,  and  when 
they  die  they  die  in  him,  or  else  those  who  live 
out  of  Christ  must  die  out  of  Christ.  The  first 
supposition  can  not  be  true,  for  all  men  are  not  in 
Christ.  Then  the  second  supposition  must  be 
true,  which  is  that  those  who  live  out  of  Christ 
will  die  out  of  Christ.  Mr.  Thayer,  page  205, 
says  that  many  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin. 
This  is  an  admission  that  many  die  out  of  Christ. 
Now  mark,  the  Bible  teaches  that  a  man  may 
be  in  Christ  while  living ;  he  may  die  in  Christ, 
and  sleep  in  Jesus.  Then  comes  in  the  declara- 
tion of  Paul,  "  The  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first." 
Why  say  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first,  if  there 
be  no  dead  out  of  Christ  V  It  is  perfectly  clear  that 
two  characters  are  contemplated  in  this  text,  the 
dead  in  Christ  and  the  dead  out  of  Christ.  But 
Universalists  teach  that  all  will  be  raised  in  Christ, 
no  matter  how  they  die.  Paul  might  fight  and 
run  and  press  and  icrestle,  and  finally  be  behead- 
ed for  Christ's  sake.  But  what  of  it?  It  will 
amount  to  nothing  in  the  end.  The  man  who 
murders  his  fellow-being  in  cold  blood,  and  the 
next  moment  kills  himself,  will  be  just  as  well 
oiF  in  the  resurrection  as  Paul.  This  puts  religion 
at  a  very  low  price. 

"  And  this  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  that 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  229 

every  one  which  seeth  the  Son,  and  believeth  on 
him,  may  have  everlasting  life:  and  I  will  raise 
him  up  at  the  last  dayJ'  (John  vi.  40.)  Why  say 
that  he  may  have  everlasting  life  ?  And  why  say 
that  he  shall  be  raised  up  at  the  last  day,  when  all 
are  alike  to  be  raised  up  at  the  last  day?  But  it 
will  be  proper  to  notice  that  Christ  fixes  the  judg- 
ment of  unbelievers  upon  this  same  last  day.  Hear 
his  words.  "  He  that  rejecteth  me,  and  receiveth 
not  my  words,  hath  one  that  judgeth  him :  the 
word  that  I  have  spoken,  the  same  shall  judge 
him  in  the  last  day^  (John  xii.  48.)  Here  are 
two  characters.  The  one  receives  Christ,  and  the 
other  rejects  him.  Both  are  to  be  present  at  the 
las:t  day.  There  is  a  distinction  now  between  the 
believer  and  the  unbeliever — so  shall  it  be  in  the 
last  day. 

I  now  invite  special  attention  to  a  very  im- 
portant passage.  "  Marvel  not  at  this :  for  the  hour 
is  coming,  in  the  which  all  that  are  in  the  graves 
shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth;  they 
that  have  done  good,  unto  the  resurrection  of  life; 
and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection 
of  damnation."  (John  v.  28,  29.)  Mr.  Guild,  on 
page  220,  says  that  Christ  had  no  allusion  to  a 
literal  resurrection,  but  a  resurrection  from  moral 
death.  Mr.  Thayer,  on  page  330,  says  that  the 
Savior  is  speaking  of  a  moral  or  spiritual  rcsur- 


230  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

rection,  and  not  of  a  literal, — a  resurrection  from 
ignorance,  unbelief ,  and  spiritual  darkness.  Let  us 
examine  this  carefully.  In  the  twenty -fifth  verse 
Christ  says,  "Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  The 
hour  is  coming,  and  now  is,  when  the  dead  shall 
hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God:  and  they  that 
hear  shall  live  J  ^  Three  kinds  of  death  are  spoken 
of  in  the  Scriptures,  natural,  spiritual,  and  eternal. 
In  the  twenty-fifth  verse  the  Savior  is  speaking  of 
a  spiritual  resurrection,  which  seemed  to  have 
surprised  the  persons  about  him  very  much,  as 
Nicodemus  was  surprised  when  our  Lord  taught 
him  the  doctrine  of  the  new  birth.  The  Savior 
seeing  this,  said,  "  Marvel  not  at  this :"—  do  not 
wonder  at  this — "for  the  hour  is  coming," — he 
does  not  say,  as  in  the  twenty-fifth  verse,  that  it 
now  is,  but  it  is  coming, — "in  the  which  all  that 
are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall 
come  forth."  The  word  graves  occurs  in  Matthew 
xxvii.  52,  53.  "And  the  graves  w^ere  opened; 
and  many  bodies  of  the  saints  which  slept 
arose,  and  came  out  of  the  graves  after  his 
resurrection,  and  went  into  the  holy  city,  and 
appeared  unto  many."  The  same  language  is 
used  as  in  the  passage  now  under  review;  they 
"came  out  of  the  graves."  No  one,  so  far  as 
I  know,  denies  that  a  literal  resurrection  is  re- 
ferred to  in  Matthew  xxvii.     But  let  us  suppose 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  231 

for  a  moment  that  the  resurrection  referred  to  by 
Christ  in  John  v.  28  was  a  moral,  or  spiritual  res- 
urrection. The  graves  mean  graves  of  ignorance, 
unbelief,  and  spiritual  darkness.  Then  the  passage 
would  read,  "  They  that  have  done  good,  in  the 
graves  of  ignorance,  unbelief,  and  spiritual  dark- 
7iess,  shall  come  forth  unto  the  resurrection  of  life; 
and  they  that  have  done  evil,  in  the  graves  of 
ignorance,  unbelief,  and  spiritual  darkness,  shall 
come  forth  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation." 
What  kind  of  resurrection  is  that  which  is  unto 
damnation  ?  Men  who  are  dead  in  sin  arc  to  be 
raised  to  damnation.  This  is  what  Universalists 
call  a  moral  or  spiritual  resurrection. 

If  the  doctrine  of  a  literal  resurrection  is  tauo-ht 
anywhere  in  the  Bible,  it  is  taught  in  John  v.  28, 
29.  IS'o  language  could  be  more  specific.  The 
reference  is  to  those  that  are  literally  dead.  They 
shall  come  forth ;  some  to  life,  and  some  to  con- 
demnation. Those  who  are  morally  dead,  and  in 
the  graves  of  ignorance  and  unbelief,  are  already 
condemned.  What  is  the  nature  of  that  moral  or 
spiritual  resurrection  which  is  from  condemnation 
to  condemnation?  "What  utter  nonsense  Uni- 
versalism  makes  of  God's  word.'*  It  is  impossible 
to  make  any  sense  out  of  this  passage,  unless  you 
apply  it  to  a  future  general  resurrection,  and  a  man- 
ifest distinction  of  character  in  that  resurrection. 


232  UNIVERSAL   RESTORATION 

"If  by  any  means  I  might  attain  unto  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead/'  (Philippians  iii.  11.)  Paul 
had  suffered  almost  everything  for  the  hope  of  the 
resurrection.  He  had  counted  all  things  loss  for 
Christ's  sake.  lie  had  run  and  pressed  and  fought 
and  suffered.  What  for  ?  "  If  by  any  means  I 
might  attain  unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.'* 
Kow  if  all  are  to  fare  alike  in  the  resurrection,  if 
there  is  to  be  no  distinction  of  character,  what 
could  have  induced  the  apostle  to  suffer  and  worry 
himself  about  it  as  he  did?  If  a  Universalist  had 
been  with  Paul,  he  would  have  told  him  doubtless 
that  he  was  making  a  complete  fool  of  himself. 
He  might  worry  and  work  and  suffer  as  he 
pleased,  it  would  not  make  the  matter  any  better, 
nor  any  worse.  As  to  the  resurrection,  he  would 
attain  to  that  anyhow,  and  have  no  better  charac- 
ter than  those  who  persecuted  him.  Can  any  one 
believe  that  Paul  was  a  Universalist?  Compare 
this  passage  with  Hebrews  xi.  35.  Here  it  is  de- 
clared that  believers  endured  the  most  terrible 
persecution,  "  not  accepting  deliverance ;  that  they 
might  obtain  a  better  resurrection.  They  had  in 
their  mind  a  better  resurrection."  What  is  implied 
in  the  idea  of  a  better  resurrection,  if  there  is  to 
be  no  distinction  of  character  in  the  resurrection? 
If  all  are  to  be  raised  alike,  what  need  was  there 
of  suffering  as  they  did  in  order  to  obtain  a  better 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  233 

resurrection  ?    The  obvious  meaning  of  the  passage 
is  this :  they  sought,  by  faith  and   obedience,   to 
obtain  a  better  resurrection  than  they  could  or 
would  attain  to  if  they  lived  and  died  in  sin.     But 
Universalists  say  there  is  no  better  resurrection ;  it 
will  all  be  the  same;    saint    and  sinner,  believer 
and  unbeliever,  will  obtain  the  same  resurrection. 
I  shall   examine  but  one  more  passage  in  this 
connection.     "  But  they  which  shall  be  accounted 
worthy  to  obtain  that  world,  and  the  resurrection 
from   the   dead."     (Luke   xx.   35.)     There   is   no 
mistake  as  to  the  subject-matter  under  consider- 
ation.    It  related  to  a  literal  resurrection.     There 
came  to  Jesus  certain  of  the  Sadducees,  which  deny 
that  there  is  any  resurrection,  and  proposed  to  him 
a  question.     There  was  a  woman  that  had  seven 
husbands.     All  died;  and  last  of  all,  the  woman 
died.     I^ow  the  question  was,  "  In  the  resurrection, 
whose  wife  shall  she  be?"     The  Savior  told  them 
they  erred,  not  knowing    the  Scriptures  nor  the 
power  of  God.     They  supposed  that  if  there  would 
be  a  resurrection,  the  same  relations  would  exist 
in^that  state  that  existed  here.     But  Jesus  said, 
"  They  which  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to  obtain 
that  world,  and  the  resurrection  from   the   dead, 
neither  marry,  nor  are  given  in  marriage,  but  are 
equal  unto  the  angels."     Universalists  themselves 
admit  that  a  literal   resurrection   is   the   subject- 


234  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

matter  referred  to  in  this  passage.  Then  the  only 
point  to  settle  is  what  the  Savior  meant  by  the 
term  worthy.  On  page  324  Mr.  Guild  expresses 
the  opinion  that  the  word  worthy  refers  to  the 
different  degrees  of  value  which  are  to  be  attached 
to  the  different  orders  of  God's  animal  creation; 
that  is,  Jesus  used  the  word  worthy  to  show  that 
mankind  is  of  more  value  than  birds  and  beasts. 
But  unfortunately  for  Mr.  Guild's  theory,  there  is 
nothing  said  in  this  whole  connection  about  birds 
and  beasts.  Jesus  is  talking  to  the  Sadducees 
about  the  resurrection.  There  is  nothing  in  the 
connection  that  can  be  construed  into  a  compari- 
son of  value  between  mankind  and  birds  and 
beasts.  In  looking  over  the  theology  of  Univers- 
alism,  I  have  met  with  a  good  many  extravagant 
things,  but  nothing  more  extravagant  and  ridicu- 
lous than  this.  The  Savior  is  anowering  an  ob- 
jection raised  by  the  Sadducees  against  the  doc- 
trine of  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  What  had 
birds  and  beasts  to  do  with  that?  Jesus  said, 
*'But  they  which  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to 
obtain  that  world,  and  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead."  If  the  Savior  had  been  a  Universalist,  he 
never  would  have  used  such  language.  He  would 
have  said,  "But  in  the  resurrection  they  neither 
marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage,  but  all  mankind 
shall  be  equal  unto  the  angels."     But  he  said  not 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  235 

SO.  Only  those  which  shall  be  accounted  worthy 
shall  be  equal  unto  the  angels.  The  comparison 
relates  to  character,  and  teaches  as  plainly  as 
language  can  teach  anything,  that  some  will  not 
be  accounted  worthy  to  obtain  that  world,  and 
this  particular  resurrection  from  the  dead. 

In  closing  this  chapter  it  will  be  proper  to  state 
clearly  and  distinctly  the  point  of  difierence. 
Universalists  claim  that  all  mankind  will  be  made 
holy  in  the  resurrection.  In  opposition  to  this 
theory  I  have  presented  a  number  of  scripture 
arguments,  to  show  that  there  will  be  a  distinction 
of  character  in  the  resurrection,  such,  for  in- 
stance, as  these:  "  Some  shall  awake  to  life,  and 
some  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt."  '' Ye 
shall  be  recompensed  at  the  resurrection  of  the 
just."  "  There  shall  be  a  resurrection,  both  of  the 
just  and  unjust."  "  The  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise 
first."  "  They  that  have  done  good,  unto  the  res- 
urrection of  life,  and  they  which  have  done  evil, 
unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation."  "  A  better 
resurrection."  "They  which  shall  be  accounted 
worthy  to  obtain  that  world  and  the  resurrection." 

Do  the  Scriptures  teach  that  infidels,  atheists, 
blasphemers,  unbelievers,  thieves,  and  robbers  will 
have  part  in  the  first  resurrection?  Do  they  im- 
pliedly teach  that  such  persons  who  die  as  they 
live,  die  in  sin  and  unbelief,  will  be  accounted 


236  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

worthy  to  obtain  that  world  and  the  resurrection . 
Do  the  Scriptures  teach  that  the  power  of  God, 
exerted  iu  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  will  change 
the  moral  character  of  the  soul?  The  Scriptures 
do  most  emphatically  teach  that  the  '^  Son  of  man 
shall  come  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels 
with  him."  "  All  nations  shall  be  gathered  before 
him."  And  He  shall  separate  them  one  from 
another,  llie  wicked  shall  go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment,  and  the  righteous  into  life  eternal. 


CABEFULLY  EXAMINED.  237 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

A  FUTURE  GENERAL  JUDGMENT. 

Having  proved  in  the  preceding  chapters,  from 
plain,  unambiguous  passages  of  scripture,  that  the 
second  coming  of  Christ  is  yet  in  the  future,  and 
that  there  will  be  a  distinction  of  character  in  the 
resurrection,  we  are  prepared  to  examine  the  word 
of  God  touching  the  judgment  of  the  last  day.  If 
it  were  necessary,  we  might  spend  some  time  in 
arguing  on  the  reasonableness  of  and  the  necessity 
for  a  future  general  judgment.  But  we  shall  ap- 
peal at  once  to  the  word  of  God.  It  may  be  neces- 
sary to  state,  before  producing  any  scripture  proof, 
that  Universalist  authors  deny  the  doctrine  of  a 
future  general  judgment. 

On  page  255  Mr.  Thayer  says,  "The  gospel- 
day,  or  the  period  of  Christ's  reign,  is  the  judg- 
ment-day in  which  every  one  is  rewarded  accord- 
ing to  what  he  does,  whether  good  or  bad."  On 
page  259  he  says,  "  The  judgment  is  spiritual  and 
not  literal;  or,  in  other  words,  it  is  by  the  truth, 
by  the  gospel,  and  not  in  person."     According  to 


238  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

this  author  the  judgmeut-day  is  the  day  of  Christ's 
spiritual  reign;  it  is  not  literal,  nor  in  person. 
And  during  this  day  every  one  is  fully  punished 
for  all  the  evil  he  did,  and  fully  rewarded  for  all 
the  good  he  did.  On  page  274  he  says,  "The 
thing  done  is  our  reward  or  our  punishment,  our 
heaven  or  our  hell."  On  page  275  he  says,  "  The 
thing  done  is  its  own  reward,  there  is  no  other." 
Paul,  poor  fellow,  did  not  think  so.  Hear  his 
words :  "  I  am  now  ready  to  be  offered,  and  the 
time  of  my  departure  is  at  hand.  I  have  fought  a 
good  fight,  I  have  finished  my  course,  I  have 
kept  the  faith :  henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for 
me  a  crown  of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the 
righteous  judge,  shall  give  me  at  that  day:  and 
not  to  me  only,  but  unto  all  them  also  that  love 
his  appearing,"  If  there  were  not  another  passage 
in  the  Bible  to  prove  a  future  judgment  and  a 
future  retribution,  this  would  be  sufiicient. 

Paul  looked  for  a  crown.  From  whom?  The 
Lord,  the  righteous  judge.  When?  At  that 
day.  Not  now ;  not  in  this  world,  but  hence- 
forth ;  at  that  day.  And  not  to  him  only,  but  unto 
all  them  that  love  his  appearing.  But  Mr.  Thayer 
says  every  man  finds  his  heaven  or  his  hell  in  what 
lie  does;  no  man  is  rewarded  in  the  future  for 
what  he  does  here.  But  Paul  had  the  crown  in 
view.     It  was  laid  up,  but  not  in  possession,  and 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  239 

would  not  be  until  that  day.  "Was  this  the  gospel- 
day  V  Surely  not,  for  Paul  was  then  living  in  the 
gospel-day.  It  was  in  the  future ;  it  was  the  day 
of  judgment. 

Mr.  Guild,  on  page  184,  says,  ''  The  judgment  is 
under  Christ,  and  confined  to  his  kingdom  on 
earth.  Mankind  are  judged  and  awarded  in  strict 
accordance  with  their  merit  or  demerit.  This 
judgment  is  confined  to  the  gospel  kingdom  on 
earth, — it  is  the  last  judgment, — it  precedes  the 
resurrection,  and  will  have  been  closed  at  the  res- 
urrection of  the  dead."  When  speaking  of  the 
time  and  place  of  the  judgment  he  says,  page  185, 
"The  Scriptures  conclusively  show  that  it  is  in  the 
earth,  on  the  earth,  under  the  sun,  confined  to 
earth  and  the  life  of  man."  This  will  suffice  to 
show  that  Universalists  teach  that  the  judgment  is 
confined  to  this  world,  and  that  when  men  die 
they  are  fully  rewarded  for  all  the  good  they  did, 
and  fully  punished  for  all  the  evil  they  did.  If 
this  be  true,  men  are  neither  saints  nor  sinners 
when  they  die.  When  they  go  into  the  future 
world  they  are  not  responsible  for  anything  they 
did  while  here,  and  hence  must  be  as  destitute  of 
character  as  the  beast  that  perishes.  Yet  Univers- 
alist  authors  say  that  all  men  will  need  a  moral  or 
spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection.  What  need 
of  such  a  change  if  all  men  are  judged  and  awarded 


240  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

here  on  earth V  Such  a  change  is  not  only  not 
necessary,  but  absohitely  impossible  on  the  hy- 
pothesis that  all  men  are  fully  awarded  on  earth. 
On  the  doctrine  of  a  future  general  judgment,  I 
shall  in  the  first  place  invite  attention  to  several 
passages  that  speak  of  the  judgment  as  yet  in  the 
future.  The  word  of  God  must  guide  us  in  this 
investigation.  "For  God  shall  bring  every  work 
into  judgment,  with  every  secret  thing,  whether  it 
be  good,  or  whether  it  be  evil.''  (Ecclesiastes  xii. 
14.)  This  is  a  plain  text,  and  declares  what  God 
shall  do;  not  what  he  has  done,  nor  what  he  was 
then  doing,  but  what  he  would  do  in  the  future. 
The  all-wise  and  heart-searching  God  shall  bring 
every  work  into  judgment,  with  every  secret  thing, 
whether  it  be  good  or  evil.  I^ow,  if  in  this  life 
men  do  exert  an  influence  for  evil  or  for  good,  and 
if  that  influence  continues  after  they  are  dead, 
which  it  seems  to  me  no  man  of  common  sense 
will  deny,  then  will  appear  the  necessity  of  a  future 
judgment.  How  will  God  bring  every  work  into 
judgment  during  a  man's  life,  when  much  of  that 
work  is  accomplished  after  he  is  dead?  Tom 
Paine's  "Age  of  Reason"  did  vastly  more  to  turn 
men  away  from  Christ  after  the  death  of  the 
author  than  it  did  before.  One  of  three  things 
must  be  true :  either,  1st,  man  is  not  responsible 
for  his  influence;   or,  2d,  his  influence  dies  with 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  241 

him;  or,  3d,  there  must  be  a  future  general  judg- 
ment, when  God  will  bring  every  work,  with  every 
secret  thing,  before  him. 

"For  we  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment- 
seat  of  Christ;  that  every  one  may  receive  the 
things  done  in  his  body,  according  to  that  he  hath 
done,  whether  it  he  good  or  bad."  (II.  Corinthians 
V.  10.)  It  would  have  been  impossible  for  Paul, 
or  any  other  man,  whether  inspired  or  uninspired, 
to  have  employed  words  that  would  more  fully 
and  clearly  express  the  idea  of  a  future  general 
judgment.  Men  may  quibble  as  they  please ;  there 
it  stands.  "  We  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment- 
seat  of  Christ.^'  The  apostle  is  not  speaking  of 
what  had  been,  nor  of  what  was  then  transpiring, 
but  of  something  yet  future.  And  when  they 
appear  every  one,  each  individual,  shall  receive 
according  to  what  he  had  done  in  the  body, 
whether  it  be  good  or  bad.  "  The  soul,"  says  Dr. 
Clarke,  "is  the  grand  agent;  the  body  is  but  its 
instrument.  And  it  [the  soul]  shall  receive  ac- 
cording to  what  it  has  done  in  the  body.'' 

"  But  why  dost  thou  judge  thy  brother  ?  or  why 
dost  thou  set  at  naught  thy  brother?  for  we  shall 
all  stand  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ." 
(Romans  xiv.  10.)  Paul  is  reasoning  against  the 
practice  of  judging  and  condemning  each  other, 
and  assigns  as  a  reason  why  we  should  not,  by  the 

16 


242  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

solemn  statement  that  we  shall  all  stand  before  the 
judgment-seat  of  Christ.  He  does  not  say  that  all 
have  stood  there,  or  that  all  do  now  stand  there, 
but  he  declares  that  they  shall  stand  there.  And 
in  the  twelfth  verse  he  adds,  "  So  then  every  one 
of  us  shall  give  account  of  himself  to  God."  The 
judgment  will  not  only  be  general,  but  particular. 
All  shall  stand  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ; 
but  every  one  shall  give  account  of  himself  to 
God.  All  the  evangelical  churches  in  the  land  be- 
lieve in  the  doctrine  of  a  future  general  judgment. 
Examine  their  confessions  of  faith,  and  you  will 
not  find  in  any  one  of  them  where  this  doctrine 
is  more  clearly  and  forcibly  taught  than  in  these 
scriptures. 

The  Scriptures  not  only  speak  of  the  judgment 
as  yet  in  the  future,  but  fix  it  at  a  set  time.  '^  He 
hath  appointed  a  day,  in  the  which  he  will  judge  the 
world  in  rightousness  by  that  man  whom  he  hath 
ordained."  (Acts  xvii.  31.)  In  the  day  when  God 
shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men  by  Jesus  Christ." 
(Romans  ii.  16.)  "The  judgment  of  the  great 
day."  (Jude  6.)  "The  Lord  knoweth  how  to 
deliver  the  godly  out  of  temptation,  and  to  reserve 
the  unjust  unto  the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punish- 
ed." (II.  Peter  ii.  9.)  "He  that  rejecteth  me,  and 
receiveth  not  my  words,  hath  one  that  judgeth 
him :  the  word  that  I  have  spoken,  the  same  shall 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  243 

judge  him  in  the  last  day^  (John  xii.  48.)  In 
these  passages  we  have,  "the  day  of  judgment,'* 
"  the  day  when  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men," 
"the  judgment  of  the  great  day^''  and  the  judg- 
ment of  the  "  last  day."  l^ow  if  you  will  connect 
these  passages  with  those  already  examined,  which 
speak  of  the  judgment  as  being  yet  future,  you 
will  see  a  remarkable  similarity.  These  texts 
that  fix  the  judgment  at  a  set  time  teach  that  it 
is  yet  future.  Kow  if  Paul  had  said  that  God 
hath  appointed  ''this  day,  or  these  days,"  in- 
stead of  "  a  day,"  and  "  the  day,"  and  if  Jude  had 
said  "this  day"  instead  of  "the  great  day,"  and  if 
Jesus  had  said  "the  word  that  I  have  spoken"  is 
judging  men  in  this  day,  instead  of  saying  "it 
shall  judge  him  in  the  last  day,"  then  Universalism 
might  have  claimed  some  support  from  these  texts ; 
but  as  it  is,  they  are  all  against  it.  But  Universal- 
ists  urge  that  the  words  "a  day,"  "the  day,"  "the 
last  day,"  and  "  the  last  great  day,"  are  not  suffi- 
ciently specific  to  prove  the  doctrine  of  a  future 
judgment.  Then  you  are  referred  to  Luke  x.  12,  T. 
Thessalonians  v.  4,  and  II.  Timothy  iv.  8,  where 
the  day  of  judgment  is  spoken  of  as  "that  day." 
If  Christ  and  the  apostles  were  all  Universalists, 
how  shall  we  account  for  the  language  they  em- 
ployed? '  In  what  other  language  could  tliey  have 
more  clearly  and  forcibly  taught  the  doctrine  of  a 


244  UNIVERSAL     llESTORATION 

future  general  judgment?  It  is  proper  to  observe, 
further,  that  they  were  addressing  a  people  who 
very  generally  believed  in  such  an  event.  This 
will  appear  by  the  following  extract  from  the 
discourse  of  Josephus  concerning  hades:  "All 
men,  the  just  as  well  as  the  unjust,  shall  be 
brought  before  God  the  word,  for  to  him  hath  the 
Father  committed  all  judgment*  This  person,  ex- 
ercising a  righteous  judgment  of  the  Father  to- 
ward all  men,  hath  prepared  a  just  sentence  for 
every  one  according  to  his  work;  at  whose  judg- 
ment-seat, where  all  men,  and  angels,  and  demons 
shall  stand ;  they  will  send  forth  one  voice  and  say. 
Just  is  the  judgment."  The  question  concerning 
the  opinion  of  Josephus  is  not  whether  he  was  cor- 
rect in  his  belief  in  a  future  general  judgment. 
The  point  is  this :  Josephus  expressed  what  was  the 
general  opinion  of  the  people  at  that  day,  and  has 
been  ever  since.  ]^ow  that  Christ  and  the  apostles, 
knowing  that  this  was  the  general  opinion,  should 
have  almost  constantly  employed  language  and 
terms  which  they  must  have  known  would  be  in- 
terpreted to  mean  a  future  general  judgment,  is 
perfectly  unaccountable — especicdly  if  they  ivere 
all  Universalists. 

The  Scriptures  not  only  teach,  in  plain  words 
and  phrases,  that  the  judgment  is  yet  in  the 
future,  and   at   a   set  time,   but   they  also   show 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  245 

that  the  judgment  of  former  generations  is  yet  to 
come. 

"  It  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  the  land  of  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah  in  the  day  of  judgment,  than  for 
that  city."  (Matthew  x.  15.)  ''But  I  say  unto 
you,  that  it  shall  be  more  tolerable  in  that  day  for 
Sodom,  than  for  that  city."  (Luke  x.  12.)  "  And 
thou,  Capernaum,  it  shall  be  more  tolerable  for 
the  land  of  Sodom  in  the  day  of  judgment,  than 
for  thee."  (Matt.  xi.  23,  24.)  "The  queen  of  the 
south  shall  rise  up  in  the  judgment  with  the  men 
of  this  generation,  and  condemn  them.  The  men 
of  ITineveh  shall  rise  up  in  the  judgment,  and 
shall  condemn  it."  (Luke  xi.  31,  32.)  I^ow 
observe  that  Christ  does  not  say  that  it  was  or  is 
more  tolerable  for  those  cities  than  for  those  to 
whom  he  was  then  speaking,  but  it  shall  be.  And 
when  does  Christ  say  it  shall  be  ?  In  the  day  of 
judgment — in  that  day.  The  plain  meaning  of 
these  passages  is  this:  the  judgment  of  all  nations 
is  yet  in  the  future ;  and  when  that  day  shall 
come  it  will  be  more  tolerable  for  the  Sodomites 
than  for  those  who  had  heard  and  rejected 
Christ.  All  men  shall  receive  according  to  what 
they  have  done,  and  according  to  what  their 
privileges  have  been.  If  those  who  live  in  the 
light  of  the  gospel  and  refuse  to  accept  Christ, 
their  condemnation   will    be  greater    than    those 


246  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

whose  advantages  were  less.  This  is  clearly  im- 
plied in  such  passages  as  this :  "  For  if  the  word 
spoken  by  angels  was  steadfast,  and  every  trans- 
gression and  disobedience  received  a  just  recom- 
pense of  reward;  how  shall  we  escape,  if  we  neglect 
so  great  salvation?"  (Hebrews  ii.  2,  3.)  "If 
they,"  says  Dr.  Clarke,  "  who  had  fewer  privileges 
than  we  have,  to  whom  God  spoke  in  divers  man-^ 
ners,  by  angels  and  prophets,  fell  under  the  dis- 
pleasure of  their  Maker,  *  *  *  how  shall  we 
escape  wrath  to  the  uttermost  if  we  neglect  the 
salvation  provided  for  us."  Did  the  Sodomites  es- 
cape V  Jude  says,  verse  7,  that  they  are  "  suffering 
the  vengeance  of  eternal  lire."  Awful  as  the  pun- 
ishment of  the  Sodomites  is,  yet  Jesus  says  it 
shall  be  more  tolerable  for  them  in  the  day  of  judg- 
ment than  for  those  to  whom  and  of  whom  he 
was  then  speaking. 

It  is  further  stated  in  the  passages  quoted,  that 
the  queen  of  the  south,  and  the  men  of  ITineveh, 
shall  rise  up  with  those  that  saw  and  heard  the 
Son  of  God,  and  condemn  them.  But  if  there 
is  no  future  general  judgment,  how  can  this  be? 
The  Ninevites  lived  more  than  eight  hundred  years 
before  Christ.  How  then  could  they  rise  up  and 
condemn  them  in  his  day?  And  Christ  himself 
puts  it  still  in  the  future.  '''It  shall  beJ'  ^ot  has 
been,  not   now   is,  but  it   shall   be   in   that  day. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  247 

Moreover  it  is  said,  "  They  shall  rise  up  with  this 
generation — at  the  same  time."  This  not  only 
puts  the  judgment  in  the  future,  but  after  the 
resurrection — after  this  rising  up.  There  has  never 
heen  an  event  since  the  days  of  Christ  to  which 
these  passages  can  with  any  degree  of  propriety 
be  applied.  Add  to  these  passages  the  language 
of  Paulas  he  stood  before  Felix,  and  "reasoned 
of  righteousness,  temperance,  and  judgment  to 
come,"  and  you  will  have,  in  as  clear  a  manner 
as  language  can  express  it,  the  facts  of  a  future 
general  judgment.  It  should  not  for  a  moment  be 
forgotten  that  the  prevailing  opinion  among  the 
Jews  was  that  there  would  be  a  future  general 
judgment.  Christ  and  the  apostles  knew  this,  and 
constantly  used  language  and  employed  illustra- 
tions which  they  must  have  known  would  be  in- 
terpreted to  mean  a  judgment  still  in  the  future. 
Now  if  the  doctrine  of  a  future  general  judgment 
is  not  true,  we  are  forced  to  conclude  that  both 
Christ  and  the  apostles  intentionally  deceived  the 
people.  I  know  of  no  words,  in  any  language 
under  the  heavens,  that  would  more  clearly  and 
more  forcibly,  teach  the  doctrine  of  a  future  gen- 
eral judgment  than  those  used  by  the  sacred  writers. 
The  Christian  fathers,  and  nearly  all  the  theolo- 
gians and  Bible  students,  from  the  days  of  the  last 
apostle  until  now,  have  understood  the  word  of 


248  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

God  to  teach  the  doctrine  of  a  judgment  yet  to 
come. 

!N"ext  in  order  we  will  examine  a  few  of  the 
many  passages  that  speak  of  the  judgment  after 
death.  "And  he  commanded  us  to  preach  unto 
the  people,  and  to  testify  that  it  is  he  which  was  or- 
dained of  God  to  be  th^  Judge  of  quick  and  dead." 
(Acts  X.  42.)  "  I  charge  thee  therefore  before  God, 
and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  judge  the 
quick  and  the  dead  at  his  appearing  and  his  king- 
dom." (II.  Timothy  iv.  1.)  "  Who  shall  give  ac- 
count to  him  that  is  ready  to  judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead."  (I.  Peter  iv.  5.)  Christ  is  to  judge  the 
quick  and  the  dead.  By  the  terms  quick  and  dead 
we  are  to  understand:  (1.)  "All  that  had  lived 
from  the  foundation  of  the  world  till  that  time, 
and  all  that  were  then  alive.  (2.)  All  that  should 
be  found  alive  at  the  day  of  judgment,  as  well  as 
all  that  had  died  previously."  This  judgment  is 
to  occur  at  the  time  of  his  coming.  Paul  speaks 
of  some  who  will  be  living  at  the  time  of  Christ's 
coming,  and  some  that  will  be  dead.  But  the  dead 
shall  be  raised  up.  They  shall  come  forth,  some 
to  life,  and  some  to  condemnation.  All  shall  be 
judged,  the  quick  and  the  dead.  "  For  we  must  all 
appear  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ;" — those 
that  shall  be  found  alive,  and  all  that  had  died 
If  this  is  not  the  meaning  of  these  passages,  then 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  249 

what  is  meant  by  judging  the  quick  and  the 
dead  ? 

"  When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory 
and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit 
upon  the  throne  of  his  glory :  and  before  him  shall 
be  gathered  all  nations."  (Matthew  xxv.  31,  32.) 
Was  there  ever  a  time  in  the  past  when  all  nations 
were  gathered  before  the  Son  of  man?  At  what 
time  in  the  past  did  the  Son  of  man  come  in  his 
glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him?  If  these 
things  have  not  occurred,  they  are  yet  in  the  future. 
The  Son  of  man  must  yet  come ;  all  nations  must 
yet  stand  before  him  ;  the  quick  and  the  dead  must 
yet  be  judged.  To  a  Christian  who  is  earnestly 
seeking  to  obey  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  these 
are  interesting  passages.  How  it  must  have 
thrilled  the  hearts  of  the  Galileans  when  the 
angel  said.  This  same  Jesus  shall  come  again  in 
like  manner  as  ye  see  him  ascend  into  heaven. 
He  shall  come,  and  all  his  holy  angels  with  him ; 
and  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  nations,  that 
every  man  may  be  judged  according  to  the  things 
done  in  the  body,  whether  they  be  good  or  bad. 

"And  as  it  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die, 
but  after  this  the  judgment:  so  Christ  was  once 
offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many."  (Heb.  ix.  27.) 
Universalists  contend  that  tois  aiUhroj^ois,  mstead  of 
being  translated  meUj  should  have  been  translated 


250  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

these  men,  or  those  men.  But,  unfortunately,  that 
word  is  not  so  translated  anywhere  in  the  Bible. 
Tois  is  an  article,  and  is  never  translated  these  or 
those.  Their  object  in  claiming  this  translation  is 
to  make  it  apply  to  the  Jewish  high-priests.  Their 
rendering  of  the  passage  in  substance  would  be 
this.  The  Jewish  high-priests  went  into  the  holiest 
of  holies,  and  died  tyjncally,  and  after  this  came 
out  and  blessed  the  people.  E"ow  if  the  dying 
here  spoken  of  was  ligurative,  then  the  offering  of 
Christ  was  ligurative  also.  Mark  well  the  lan- 
guage of  the  text — ''  as  it  is  appointed  unto  men 
once  to  die.  *  *  ^  So  Christ  was  once  offered 
to  bear  the  sins  of  many."  As  surely  as  the  death 
of  Christ  was  literal,  so  surely  is  the  death  to 
which  men  are  appointed  literal. 

But  they  still  have  another  way  of  disposing  of 
this  troublesome  text.  They  hold  that  the  words 
'^  after  this  the  judgment,^^  means  that  after  this 
appointment  men  shall  be  judged.  The  judgment 
comes  before  men  die.  They  are  appointed  to  die, 
then  during  their  lives  they  are  judged,  and  then 
die  after  the  judgment.  Let  us  test  this  curious 
rendering.  "  It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to 
die,  and  after  this  the  resurrection."  Would  any 
man  suppose  that  the  resurrection  came  before 
death?  There  would  be  just  as  much  reason  in 
claiming  that  the  resurrection  came  before  death 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  251 

as  to  claim  that  tlie  judgment  came  before  death. 
There  is  no  way  of  avoiding  the  force  of  this  text. 
It  is  plain  and  pointed.  "It  iS  appointed  unto 
men  once  to  die."  God  said,  '''■Dust  thou  art,  and 
unto  dust  t/iou  shalt  return.'^  This  is  the  divine 
decree.  They  shall  die  but  once,  and  be  judged 
but  once;  and  as  surely  as  men  die,  so  surely  shall 
they  be  judged  after  they  die.  "  Christ  was  once 
ottered" — not  figuratively,  but  literally ;  he  died 
for  our  sins,  according  to  the  Scriptures.  But  he 
shall  come  again  a  second  time  without  sin;  that 
is,  loithout  a  sln-offerinc).  He  shall  come  without, 
sin  unto  salvation.  This  is  a  blessed  promise. 
He  shall  come  to  deliver  the  bodies  of  his  saints 
from  the  power  and  dominion  of  death.  He  shall 
come  in  his  glory;  he  shall  come  literally;  and  all 
nations  shall  stand  before  him.  "It  is  appointed 
unto  men  once  to  die,  and  after  this  the  judgment." 
"And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand 
before  God;  and  the  books  were  opened:  and 
another  book  was  opened,  which  is  the  book  of 
life:  and  the  dead  were  judged  out  of  these  things 
which  were  written  in  the  books,  according  to 
their  works."  (Revelation  xx.  12.)  "J'Ae  dead, 
small  and  greats  All  the  dead,  of  every  nation 
and  of  every  age.  The  sea  and  death  and  hell 
gave  up  the  dead  that  were  in  them.  How  exactly 
this  accords  with  the  language  of  Paul,  in  Romans 


252  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

xiv.  10.  "For  we  shall  all  stand  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ."  This  general  gathering  be- 
fore the  judgmeht-seat  of  Christ  can  not,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  occur  until  after  the  resurrection 
of  the  body.  When  all  shall  stand  before  God, 
all  nations,  then  the  books  will  be  opened,  the 
book  of  life  and  the  book  of  death ;  and  they  shall 
be  judged  out  of  those  things  which  were  written 
in  the  books.  You  may  search  the  history  of  the 
past  from  the  early  morning  of  time  unto  this  day, 
and  you  will  find  nothing  that  will  answer  to  this 
description.  John  saw  it,  but  it  was  yet  in  the 
future.  He  saw  also  that  those  whose  names  were 
not  written  in  the  book  of  life  were  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire.  ''  This  is  the  second  death."  But  in 
the  face  of  this  and  many  other  similar  passages, 
Universalists  rise  up  and  declare  that  the  Bible 
nowhere  teaches  the  doctrine  of  a  future  general 
judgment.  The  doctrine  of  a  future  heaven,  and 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  is  nowhere  in 
God's  book  more  plainly  taught  than  is  the  doc- 
trine of  a  future  general  judgment. 

In  this  chapter  we  have  presented  four  distinct 
arguments  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  a  future 
general  judgment.  These  arguments  have  not 
been  based  upon  the  mere  opinions  of  men,  but 
upon  the  plain  word  of  God. 

(1.)     It  has  been  shown  from  a  number  of  ims- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  253 

sages  that  the  judgment  is  yet  in  the  future.  It 
shall  he.  ]N"ot  now  is,  not  h^s  been,  but  shall  be. 
^'God  shall  bring  every  work  into  judgment." 
''  We  shall  all  stand  before  the  judgment-seat  of 
Christ."  "We  must  all  appear  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ."  "I  saw  the  dead,  small  and 
great,  stand  before  God." 

(2.)  It  has  been  shown  that  the  Scriptures  fix 
the  judgment  at  a  set  time.  "He  hath  apj^ointed  a 
day  in  the  which  he  will  judge  the  world."  "  In 
the  day  when  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men." 
"The  judgment  of  the  great  day."  "Unto  the  day 
of  judgment."     "  The  last  day."     "That  day." 

(3.)  Several  passages  were  introduced  which 
teach  that  the  judgment  of  former  generations  is 
yet  in  the  future.  The  Sodomites,  the  ITinevites, 
and  the  Queen  of  the  South  are  to  rise  up  in  the 
judgment  and  condemn  those  to  whom  Christ 
preached,  although  they  had  lived  and  died  hun- 
dreds of  years  before  he  uttered  these  words. 
How  can  these  words  of  the  Master  be  fulfilled, 
if  there  is  no  future  general  judgment? 

(4.)  It  has  been  shown  that  the  Scriptures  war- 
rant us  in  the  belief  that  the  judgment  is  after 
death,  and  connected  with  the  second  coming  of 
Christ.  He  is  to  j  udge  the  quick  and  the  dead  at  his 
appearing.  All  nations  are  to  be  gathered  before 
him.     The  dead,  small  and  great,  are  to  stand  be- 


254  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

fore  him.     "  It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die, 
and  after  this  the  judgment." 

Beyond  this  day  of  judgment  there  is  no  proba- 
tion. All  nations  are  to  stand  before  the  judge 
of  quick  and  dead.  They  are  to  be  judged  every 
one  according  to  his  works,  whether  they  be 
good  or  bad.  And  all  whose  names  are  not  found 
in  the  book  of  life  shall  be  cast  into  the  lake  of 
fire.  "  The  fearful,  and  unbelieving,  and  abomi- 
nable, and  murderers,  and  whoremongers,  and 
sorcerers,  and  idolaters,  and  all  liars,  shall  have 
their  part  in  the  lake  which  burneth  with  fire 
and  brimstone :  which  is  the  second  death."  But 
of  the  pure  and  good  it  is  said,  ''God  shall  wipe 
away  all  tears  from  their  eyes."  Reader,  let  no 
man  deceive  you.  There  is  a  judgment  yet  to 
come.  God  hath  appointed  a  day  in  the  which  he 
will  judge  all  men.  And  when  that  day  shall 
come,  as  come  it  will,  then  shall  every  man  under- 
stand the  force  of  that  scripture  which  says, 
"Whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also 
reap." 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  255 


CHAPTER  XV. 

THE  RIGHTEOUS  AND  THE  WICKED  SEPARATED  AT  THE 
DAY  OF  JUDGMENT. 

In  the  three  preceding  chapters  the  following 
points  have  been  carefully  considered  and  estab- 
lished: Eirst.  That  the  second  coming  of  Christ 
is  yet  in  the  future.  Second.  There  will  be  a 
manifest  distinction  of  character  in  the  resurrec- 
tion. Third.  At  the  time  of  Christ's  coming  he 
will  judge  the  world.  This  will  lead  us  to  the 
consideration  of  another  very  important  and  sol- 
emn subject,  which  is  this:  that  as  there  will  be  a 
distinction  of  character  in  the  resurrection,  so 
there  will  be  a  separation  of  character  at  the 
time  of  the  judgment. 

Universalists  hold  that  all  men  will  be  made 
holy  in  the  resurrection.  No  matter  when  they 
died,  nor  how,  they  w^ill  be  made  holy  in  the  end. 
They  do  not  tell  us  how  this  is  to  be  done,  they 
only  affirm  that  the  resurrection  means  something 
more  than  the  raising  up  of  the  body.  They  give 
no  philosophical  reason  for  their  belief,  nor  can 
they  produce  a  single  passage  of  scripture  to  prove 


256  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

it;  they  simply  affirm  it,  and  that  too  in  the  face 
of  plain,  unambiguous  passages  of  scripture,  which 
teach  the  very  opposite  of  what  they  say  they 
believe.  It  is  very  strange  how  men  who  profess 
to  believe  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God  can 
work  themselves  up  into  the  belief  that  all  men 
shall  come  forth  unto  the  resurrection  of  life  and 
fare  exactly  the  same  in  the  world  to  come.  The 
Scriptures  teach  plainly  and  positively  that  there 
shall  be  a  resurrection,  both  of  the  just  and  the  un- 
just; that  those  who  have  done  good  shall  come 
forth  unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  those  who 
have  done  evil  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation. 
But  Universalists  affirm  that  all  men  of  every 
character,  men  of  low  degree  and  of  high  degree, 
infidels,  skeptics,  atheists,  thieves,  liars,  murderers, 
and  drunkards,  who  died  as  they  lived,  will  all 
come  forth  to  the  resurrection  of  life. 

We  will  now  turn  to  a  few  of  the  many  passages 
of  scripture  which  teach  that  at  the  time  of  the 
judgment  there  will  be  a  separation  between  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked.  "And  before  him  shall 
be  gathered  all  nations :  and  he  shall  separate 
them  one  from  another,  as  a  shepherd  divideth  his 
sheep  from  the  goats."  Matt.  xxv.  32.  This 
passage,  with  what  follows,  can  not  refer  to  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  for  the  following  reasons : 
1.    All  nations  were  not  gathered  before  Christ  at 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  257 

the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  2.  The  good  and 
bad  were  not  separated  at  that  time.  The  Jews 
were  overthrown  and  scattered  among  all  nations, 
but  there  was  nothing  approaching  a  separation 
between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked.  , 

In  verse  34  we  have  the  King's  address  to  those 
on  his  right  hand.  This,  you  will  observe,  is  after 
the  separation.  ^'Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father, 
inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world."  Who  were  the  right- 
eous at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  to  whom  the 
Son  of  man  addressed  these  words,  and  into  what 
kingdom  did  they  go  ?  Those  on  the  right  hand 
were  not  only  to  go  into  this  kingdom,  but  they 
were  to  inherit  it.  This  evidently  implies  that 
they  were  heirs, — children  of  the  family, — and  as 
such  had  a  right  to  the  estate.  It  is  further  stated 
that  this  kingdom  was  prepared  for  them.  Pre- 
pared for  who?  Answer.  The  righteous,  those 
on  the  right  hand,  the  blessed  of  the  Father. 
"  Blessed  are  the  pure  in  heart,  for  they  shall  see 
God."  "  The  saints  of  the  Most  High  shall  take 
the  kingdom  and  possess  it  forever  and  ever." 
l^ow  if  these  things  did  not  occur  at  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem,  we  must  look  to  the  future  for 
their  fulfillment.  The  Son  of  man  will  come. 
All  nations  shall  be  gathered  before  him.  lie  will  ^ 
separate  them  one  from  another.     He  will  say  to 

17 


258  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

those  on  his  right  hand,  ''Come,  ye  blessed  of  my 
Father."  Has  this,  or  anything  to  which  this 
can  he  apphed,  occurred  in  the  history  of  the 
past? 

In  verse  41  we  have  the  King's  address  to  those 
on  his  left  hand.  "Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  in- 
to '[aionian]  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil 
and  his  angels."  Into  what  everlasting  fire  did 
the  wicked  go  at  the  time  of  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  ?  Where  is  that  place  which  was  pre- 
pared for  the  devil  and  his  angels?  Was  it  in  or 
about  Jerusalem  ?  Who  and  what  is  represented 
by  the  devil  and  his  angels  ?  Was  there  anything 
connected  with  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  from 
first  to  last,  to  which  this  will  apply  ?  If  so,  what 
was  it?  If  not,  then  we  must  look  for  its  fulfill- 
ment yet  in  the  future.  The  time  must  come 
when  the  Son  of  man  will  say  to  those  on  his  left 
hand,  "Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting 
fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels." 

In  verse  46  we  have  the  final  address  of  the 
King  concerning  both  parties.  "  These  shall  go 
away  into  IfcioniaTi]  everlasting  punishment :  but 
the  righteous  into  life  [^aionian']  eternal."  This 
going  away  is  to  take  place  immediately  after  the 
separation.  Two  facts  are  as  clearly  taught  in 
this  scripture  as  any  facts  could  be  taught  by  the 
use  of  human  language:     1.    The  righteous  and 


OAREi'liLLY  EXAMINED.  259 

the  wicked  shall  be  separated  at  the  day  of  judg- 
ment.    2.  That  separation  will  be  eternal. 

Dr.  Clarke,  who  is  sometimes  quoted  by  TJnivei'- 
salists  as  favoring  their  notions,  in  commenting  on 
this  forty-sixth  verse,  makes  the  following  remarks : 
"But  some  are  of  opinion  that  this  punishment 
shall  have  an  end.  This  is  as  likely  as  that  the 
glory  of  the  righteous  shall  have  an  end;  for  the 
same  word  is  used  to  express  the  duration  of 
the  punishment,  as  is  used  to  express  the  duration 
of  the  state  of  glory.  I  haVe  seen  the  best  things 
that  have  been  written  in  favor  of  the  final  redemp* 
tion  of  damned  spirits;  but  I  never  saw  an  an^ 
swer  to  the  argument  against  that  doctrine,  drawn 
from  this  verse,  but  what  sound  learning  and  crit- 
icism should  be  ashamed  to  acknowledge." 

It  is  not  and  can  not  be  true  that  those  who 
continue  in  sin  to  the  last  moment  will  be  made 
holy  in  or  by  death.  Death  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  moral  nature  of  man.  It  is  not  and  can 
not  be  true  that  those  who  live  and  die  in  sin  will 
be  made  holy  between  the  death  and  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body;  for  the  Scriptures  nowhere  in- 
form us  that  any  man  will  be  made  holy  after 
death.  It  is  not  and  can  not  be  true  that  any  man 
will  be  made  hol}^  in  or  by  the  resurrection,  for 
nothing  more  than  the  body  will  be  raised  up. 
Inasmuch,  therefore,  as  sin  inheres  in  the  moral 


^60  UNIVERSAL    ilEg1:ORAT10N 

nature  of  man,  the  physical  power  of  God,  exert- 
ed in  the  raising  up  of  the  body,  can  not  change 
that  moral  nature.  Besides,  the  Scriptures  abun- 
dantly prove  that  there  will  be  a  manifest  distinc- 
tion of  character  in  the  resurrection.  Now,  as 
the  word  of  God  nowhere  informs  us  that  any 
inan  will  be  made  holy  after  the  resurrection,  we 
are  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  there  will  be  a 
separation  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked, 
for  nothing  unholy  or  unclean  shall  ever  be  ad- 
mitted into  the  kingdom  of  glory.  "  The  pure  in 
heart  shall  see  God."  *'  He  shall  separate  them 
one  from  another,  as  a  shepherd  divideth  his  sheep 
from  the  goats." 

"And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand 
before  God ;  and  the  books  were  opened :  and 
anothei*  book  w^as  opened,  which  is  the  book  of 
life  :  and  the  dead  were  judged  out  of  those  things 
which  were  written  in  the  books,  according  to 
their  works.  And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead 
which  were  in  it;  and  death  and  hell  delivered  up 
the  dead  which  were  in  them:  and  th^y  were 
judged  every  man  according  to  their  works.  And 
death  and  hell  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire. 
This  is  the  second  death.  And  whosoever  was 
not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was  cast  into 
the  lake  of  tire."     (Revelation  xx.  12-15.) 

In  these  verses  the  fact  of  a  general  judgment  is 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  261 

clearly  taught.  The  dead,  small  and  great.  "All 
ranks,  degrees,  and  conditions  of  men."  The  sea, 
death,  and  hell  {hades)  gave  up  the  dead  which 
were  in  them;  and  every  man  was  judged  accord- 
ing to  his  works.  And  all  whose  names  were  not 
found  written  in  the  book  of  life  were  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire.  "This  is  the  second  death."  In  the 
twenty-first  chapter  John  describes  the  city  of 
God,  into  which  none  shall  enter  except  those 
whose  names  are  written  in  the  book  of  life.  It 
will  not  be  impertinent  to  ask  three  questions.  1. 
"Was  there  ever  a  time,  since  the  world  began, 
when  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stood  before  God  ? 
2.  What  are  we  to  understand  by  the  two  char- 
acters here  represented?  3.  Will  those  whose 
names  were  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life 
fare  the  same  as  those  whose  names  were  found 
there  V 

To  show,  beyond  all  question,  that  there  will  be 
a  separation  between  the  good  and  the  bad,  and 
that  all  will  not  enter  into  the  same  place,  we  quote 
the  eighth  verse  of  the  twenty-first  chapter  of 
Revelation.  "But  the  fearful,  and  unbelieving, 
and  the  abominable,  and  murderers,  and  whore- 
mongers, and  sorcerers,  and  idolators,  and  all  liars, 
shall  have  their  part."  In  the  city  of  God?  Not 
so.  Where  then  shall  they  have  their  part  ?  "  In 
the  lake  which  burneth  with  fire  and  brimstone : 


262  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

which  is  the  second  death."  This  is  the  word  of 
the  Uving  God,  concerning  those  whose  names 
were  not  found  written  in  the  hook  of  life.  Just 
such  characters  as  these  have  hved,  and  died  as 
they  lived, — in  unbelief  and  sin, —  died  cursing  the 
name  of  God.  Shall  they  enter  into  the  city  of 
the  great  King?  Read  the  twenty-seventh  verse. 
*'  And  there  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  it  anything 
that  delileth,  neither  whatsoever  worketh  abomi- 
nation, or  maketh  a  lie."  Who  then  shall  enter 
this  city  V  "  They  which  are  written  in  the  Lamb's 
book  of  life." 

Oh,  the  city  of  God,  the  home  of  the  saints. 
No  death  shall  be  there,  nor  any  more  pain.  God 
shall  wipe  away  all  tears  from  their  eyes ;  and 
there  shall  be  no  more  night.  "  He  that  over- 
cometh  shall  inherit  all  things :  and  I  will  be  his 
God,  and  he  shall  be  my  son."  ^'But  the  fearful 
and  unbelieving  shall  have  their  part  in  the  lake 
of  fire." 

But  if  Universalism  be  true,  all  these  abomina- 
ble characters,  such  as  murderers,  thieves,  liars, 
and  whoremongers,  are  to  enter  into  the  city  of 
God,  all  the  same  as  those  who  "  have  washed 
their  robes  and  made  them  white  in  the  blood  of 
the  Lamb."  With  them  it  matters  nothing  wheth- 
er a  man's  name  is  written  in  the  book  of  life  or 
not.     It  will  all  be  the  same  in  the  resurrection. 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  2G3 

This  they  affirm  in  the  face  of  all  those  plain  dec- 
larations of  God's  word  which  teach  in  unmistak- 
able terms  the  very  opposite. 

The  Scriptures,  from  beginning  to  end,  keep  up 
a  marked  distinction  between  the  righteous  and  the 
unrighteous.  Let  us  note  a  few  of  them.  "  Say 
ye  to  the  righteous,  that  it  shall  be  well  with  him : 
for  they  shall  eat  the  fruit  of  their  doings.  Woe 
unto  the  wicked !  it  shall  be  ill  with  him :  for  the 
reward  of  his  hands  shall  be  given  him."  "He 
that  believeth  ana  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved  ;  but 
he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned."  "What- 
soever a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also  reap.  For 
he  that  soweth  to  his  flesh  shall  of  the  flesh  reap 
corruption ;  but  he  that  soweth  to  the  Spirit  shall 
of  the  Spirit  reap  life  everlasting."  "Blessed  are 
the  dead  which  die  in  the  Lord."  "  The  dead  in 
Christ  shall  rise  first."  "  There  shall  be  a  resur- 
rection, both  of  the  just  and  unjust."  "Shall 
awak^  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame 
and  everlasting  contempt."  "And  shall  come 
forth:  they  that  have  done  good,  unto  the  resur- 
rection of  life;  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto 
the  resurrection  of  damnation."  "He  shall  sep- 
arate them  one  from  another,  as  a  shepherd  di- 
videtli  his  sheep  from  the  goats."  "These  shall 
go  away  into  everlasting  punishment,  but  the 
righteous   into    life    eternal."     "  Whosoever  was 


264  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

not  found  written  in  tlie  book  of  life  was  cast  into 
the  lake  of  fire." 

l^otwitlistanding  this  manifest  distinction  which 
is  kept  np  in  life,  in  death,  in  the  resurrection,  in 
the  judgment,  and  beyond  the  judgment,  Univers- 
alists  say  that  all  men,  without  distinction  of  char- 
acter, will  fare  exactly  alike.     All  will  enter  the 
city  of  God  and  be  crowned  as  the  heirs  of  glory. 
I  cherish  no  unkind  feeling  toward  any  man,  nor 
would  I  say  an  unkind  word  of  those  who  may 
differ  with  me,  yet  I  can  not  refrain  from  express- 
ing   my  astonishment  that  men  who  profess  to 
believe  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God  should, 
in  the  face  of  such  plain  declarations  of  scripture, 
believe  and  teach  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salva- 
tion of  all  men.     It  is  a  fact,  which  Universalists 
themselves  will  not  deny,  that  thousands  die  in 
ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin.     This  being  admit- 
ted, we  turn  to  the  Scriptures  to  find  some  word 
of  promise  that  will  warrant  us  in  the  belief  that 
such  as  die  in  sin  will  come  to  Christ  after  death. 
But  there  is  no  such  passage.     "They  shall  go 
away  into  everlasting  punishment."     "  They  shall 
not  see  life."     "The  wrath   of  God  abideth   on 
them."     "They  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting 
destruction."     "  They  shall  have  their  part  in  the 
lake   of  fire."    'These   and  similar  passages  may 
be  found  all  through  God's  word,  but  not  a  sin- 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  2G5 

gle  passage  whicli  teaches  that  any  who  die  in  sin 
will  be  saved  after  death. 

The  doctrine  of  Universalism,  whatever  the  pur- 
pose of  its  advocates  may  be,  is  well  calculated  to 
lead  men  to  ruin.  The  carnal  mind  is  enmity 
against  God.  Men  are  more  inclined  to  do  evil 
than  to  do  good.  This  is  manifest  from  what  we 
see  around  us  in  every-day  life.  Universalism 
comes  in  and  proclaims  to  all  men,  of  every  de- 
gree and  character^  "You  shall  ultimately  be  holy 
and  happy,  no  matter  how  you  live  nor  how  you 
die.  You  may  cheat  and  lie  and  steal  and  rob  and 
murder,  and  at  last,  when  you  are  tired  of  living, 
you  may  cut  your  throat  and  then  go  away  to  the 
home  of  the  saints."  Does  not  this  give  license  to 
men  to  follow  the  natural  inclinations  of  their  car- 
nal mind?  But  do  not  Universalists  teach  that 
men  are  punished  in  this  world  for  all  the  evil  they 
do  ?  Yes ;  but  what  do  men  whose  conscience  is 
seared  with  a  hot  iron  care  for  this?  What  does 
that  rum-seller,  whose  heart  can  no  longer  be 
moved  by  the  piteous  pleadings  and  tears  of  that 
heart-broken  wife  and  mother,  care  for  all  the 
punishment  he  can  feel  in  this  life?  He  will  take 
the  last  penny  from  his  customer,  and  then  send 
him  to  his  wife  and  children  more  like  a  demon 
than  a  man.  What  does  he  care?  If  Univers- 
alism be  true,  he  will  be  as  happy  in  the  resur- 


266  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

rectiou    as  the  most   devout  Christian   that   ever 
lived. 

Once  more :  If  Universalism  be  true,  it  makes 
the  Bible  an  unmeaning  book.  Instead  of  being  a 
light  to  guide  men,  it  has  led  astray  nhie  tenths  of 
the  best  Christians  that  ever  lived.  The  most  de- 
voted students  of  the  Bible  for  these  eighteen  hun- 
dred years  have  been  led  astray.  The  number, 
learning,  and  piety  of  those  who  reject  the  doctrine 
of  Universalism,  when  compared  with  the  number, 
learning,  and  piety  of  those  who  embrace  it,  is  at 
least  a  presumptive  argument  against  it.  The 
hour  is  near  at  hand  when  all  deception  will  van- 
ish like  smoke.  In  that  dread  hour  we  shall  be 
able  to  "  discern  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  between  him  that  serveth  God  and  him 
that  serveth  him  not."  "  Can  a  rational,  immortal 
man  peril  his  safety  upon  a  foundation  that  must 
fail  in  the  day  of  trial  ?  "  But  there  is  safety  in 
Jesus  Christ.  There  is  redemption  in  his  blood. 
"  Whosoever  believeth  in  him  shall  not  perish,  but 
have  everlasting  life." 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  267 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

THE    FUTURE    STATE    OF    THE    WICKED. 

Before  entering  directly  upon  any  scriptural  ar- 
gument concerning  the  final  destiny  of  the  wicked, 
it  may  be  well  enough  to  state  in  order  the  points 
established  in  the  four  preceding  chapters.  1.  The 
fact  that  Christ's  second  coming  is  yet  in  the  fu- 
ture was  established  by  a  number  of  plain  and  une- 
quivocal passages  of  scripture.  2.  There  will  be  a 
manifest  distinction  of  character  in  the  resurrec- 
tion. 3.  It  was  proved  by  many  plain,  unambig- 
uous texts  of  scripture  that  there  will  be  a  future 
general  judgment.  4.  That  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked  will  be  separated  at  the  time  of  the  judg- 
ment. These  four  points  being  established,  we  are 
prepared  to  examine  those  scriptures  which  treat 
of  the  future  destiny  of  the  wicked.  The  ques- 
tion to  be  considered  now  is  this.  Do  the  Scriptures 
teach  that  the  punishment  of  sinners  will  be  end- 
less? It  has  been  shown  that  Universalist  authors 
themselves  admit  that  vast  numbers  die  in  unbe- 
belief  and  sin.  It  would  be  fatal  to  Universalism 
to  deny  this,  and  it  is  none  the  less  fatal  to  admit 


268  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

it.  But  having  admitted  what  they  dare  not  deny, 
it  devolves  upon  them  to  produce  the  scripture  to 
prove  that  those  who  die  in  sin  will  come  to  Christ 
and  be  saved  after  death.  This  they  affirm  upon 
their  own  responsibility;  but  they  have  never  been 
able  to  produce  a  single  text  from  the  Bible  to 
prove  it.  This  argument  is  of  itself  sufficient  to 
prove  the  endless  punishment  of  the  wicked.  Let 
me  state  the  argument  again  :  "  Thousands  die  in 
ignorance,  unbelief,  and  sin."  The  Scriptures  no- 
where inform  us  that  any  who  die  in  sin  ever  can 
or  will  come  to  Christ  and  be  saved  after  death. 
Therefore,  all  w^ho  die  in  sin  will  forever  remain 
in  sin. 

The  Scriptures  are  not  silent  concerning  the  fu- 
ture destiny  of  the  wicked.  While  they  do  not 
furnish  any  evidence  that  sinners  will  be  saved  from 
sin  after  death,  they  do  in  unmistakable  terms  as- 
sert that  their  punishment  will  be  as  endless  as  the 
happiness  of  the  saints.  ^^  God  so  loved  the  world, 
that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 
believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  [aion- 
ian\  everlasting  life."  (John  iii.  16.)  Several 
points  in  this  text  deserve  special  notice.  1.  The 
everlasting  life  promised  is  conditional.  "Whoso- 
ever believeth  "  shall  have  it.  But  all  men  do  not 
believe  in  Christ.  Some  do  not  even  believe  that 
he  was  a  good  man,  much  less  the  Savior  of  sin- 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  26'J 

iiers*  All,  therefore,  who  do  not  believe  in  Christ 
shall  not  have  this  everlasting  life.  Jesus  said,  "I 
go  my  way,  and  ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall  die  in 
your  sins:  whither  I  go,  ye  can  not  come."  (John 
viii.  21.)  In  the  twenty-fourth  verse  of  the  same 
chapter  he  says:  "I  said  therefore  unto  you,  that 
ye  shall  die  in  your  sins :  for  if  ye  believe  not  that 
I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins."  Would  any 
man  dare  to  assert  that  such  as  die  in  their  sins 
have  this  everlasting  life  ?  The  condition  upon 
which  men  can  have  this  everlasting  life  is  faith  in 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  But  some  have  not  this 
faith ;  therefore,  Jesus  says  they  shall  die  in  their 
sins.  2.  The  word  "2^^''^'5^^"  stands  indirect  op- 
position to  "everlasting  life."  Mr.  Thayer  says 
(page  376)  that  "death  is  always  the  opposite  of 
life."  If,  then,  those  who  believe  in  Jesus  Christ 
are  to  have  everlasting  life,  what  will  those  have 
who  do  not  believe  in  him?  Our  Lord  says  they 
shall  'perish;  or,  in  other  words,  they  shall  die  in 
their  sins.  What  are  we  to  understand  by  this 
everlasting  life?  Does  it  mean  life  for  a  day  or  a 
year?  Does  the  word  (aionian)  everlasting,  in  this 
passage,  express  duration  ?  If  so,  how  long  ?  Is 
the  promise  of  everlasting  life  in  this  text  confin- 
ed to  this  life  alone,  or  does  it  include  the  life  to 
come?  Christians  have  always  understood  this 
"  everlasting  life"  to  mean  endless  life.     The  same 


270  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

word  is  used  in  tlie  preceding  verse,  and  is  trans- 
lated eternal  life.  If,  then,  the  words  (aionian) 
"everlasting  life"  mean  endless  life,  the  word  per- 
ish  can  not  mean  less  than  endless  death;  for  Mr. 
Thayer,  author  of  the  "  Theology  of  Universal- 
ism,"  says,  "  death  is  always  the  opposite  of  life." 
The  unbeliever  is  to  receive  the  opposite  of  what 
those  receive  who  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
"  And  these  shall  go  away  into  {aionian)  ever- 
lasting punishment:  but  the  righteous  into  life 
(aionian)  eternal."  (Matthew  xxv.  46.)  In  this 
tact  the  word  everlasting  qualifies  the  punishment 
of  the  wicked ;  and  the  word  eternal  qualifies  the 
life  of  the  righteous.  They  are  both  translated 
from  the  same  word  in  the  original.  If  the. 
(aionian)  everlasting  punishment  of  the  wicked 
referred  to  means  limited  time,  or  if  it  is  confined 
to  this  world,  then  the  life  (aionian)  eternal,  of  the 
righteous,  must  also  be  confined  to  this  world. 
The  primary  meaning  of  the  word  aionian,  from 
which  the  words  eternal  and  everlasting  are  trans- 
lated, is  endless.  The  learned  lexicographer,  Bret- 
schneider,  defines  it  to  mean  "that  which  is  al- 
ways— forever."  Schriellius  defines  it  "eternal." 
Groves  defines  it  "eternal,  immortal,  perpetual." 
Donagan,  Greenfield,  Liddell  and  Scott  give  it 
the  same  meaning.  A  sound,  and  indeed  the  on  I}'' 
safe  rule  of  interpretation,  is  this,  "The  subject, 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  271 

including  the  connection  or  scope  of  the  passage, 
most  commonly  determines  whether  a  word  should 
be  taken  in  a  literal  or  figurative  sense.  This  rule 
allows  every  word  to  have  a  proper  meaning  of  its 
own,  only  modified  by  the  connection  in  which  it 
is  used."  The  primary  or  proper  meaning  of  the 
word  aionian  is  endless,  or  eternal;  and  when 
used  in  a  modified  sense  it  was  used  figuratively, 
or  improperly. 

The  word  aionian  was  uniformay  used  in  the 
N'ew  Testament,  when  the  sacred  writers  wished 
to  express  endless  duration.  This  is  its  natural 
meaning,  and  it  is  never  used  in  any  other,  unless 
the  objects  in  connection  with  which  it  is  used 
are  of  limited  existence.  The  younger  Edwards, 
in  his  reply  to  Mr.  Chauncy,  states  the  fact  that 
the  word  aionias  occurs  seventy-one  times  in  the 
New  Testament.  Forty-four  times  it  is  used  to 
express  the  future  life  of  the  righteous.  In  Ro- 
mans xvi.  26,  I.  Timothy  vi.  6,  I.  Peter  v.  10, 
Hebrews  ix.  14,  it  is  used  to  express  the  perfection 
of  God.  In  II.  Corinthians  iv.  18  it  is  used  to 
express  things  eternal  in  contrast  with  things  tem- 
poral. Take  a  few  passages  in  which  this  word 
occurs.  "  "What  good  thing  shall  I  do,  that  I  may 
have  \_aionian']  eternal  life."  (Matthew  xix.  16.) 
^'  He  shall  receive  a  hundred-fold  now  in  this  time; 
and  in  the  world  to  come  [aionian']  eternal  life." 


272  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

(Mark  x.  30.)  "  The  things  which  are  not  seen  are 
\_aionianl^  eternaL"  (II.  Corinthians  iv.  18.)  "A 
far  more  exceeding  and  \_aionia7i\  eternal  weight  of 
glory."  (II.  Cor.  iv.  17.)  In  these  passages  we. 
have  the  words  "  everlasting  life,"  '^  eternal  life," 
an  ^'  eternal  weight  of  glory."  "The  things  un- 
seen are  eternal."  "Eternal  in  the  heavens." 
"The  everlasting  kingdom  of  Jesus  Christ."  In 
all  these  passages  the  word  {aionian)  is  used  and 
translated  eternal  and  everlasting.  Do  these  terms 
express  duration,  if  so,  how  long?  As  already 
stated,  this  is  the  word  commonly  used  in  the 
l!Tew  Testament,  when  the  inspired  writers  wished 
to  express  endless  duration.  In  the  passage  undei 
consideration  this  word  is  used  to  express  the 
durability  of  the  life  of  the  righteous  and  the 
durability  of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked. 
"These  shall  go  away  into  [aioniari]  punish- 
ment, but  the  righteous  into  life  [aioniaii]  eternal." 
There  is  nothing  in  the  connection  to  limit  the 
meaning  of  the  word  in  either  case.  If  the  life 
{aionian)  eternal,  of  the  righteous,  is  endless,  then 
the  (aionian)  everlasting  punishment  of  the  wicked 
must  be  endless  also.  If  the  words  "eternal 
life,"  and  "  everlasting  life,"  do  not  mean  endless 
life,  then  in  what  language  did  either  Christ  or 
the  apostles  promise  endless  life  to  any  one? 
Again,  if  the  words  everlasting  and  eternal  are  to 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  273 

be  limited  in  every  case,  when  used  in  reference  to 
the  punishment  of  the  wick-ed,  by  wliat  kiw  of 
language  are  they  to  be  understood  as  unlimited 
when  used  in  reference  to  the  future  state  of  the 
righteous,  especially  in  such  passages -as  the  one 
now  under  consideration,  where  there  is  nothing 
to  limit  the  signilication  in  one  case  more  than 
there  is  in  the  other? 

Mr.  Lee,  who  devoted  a  great  deal  of  time  to 
this  subject,  says  that  the  word  aionian  is  found 
seventy-one  times  in  the  Greek  Testament.  In 
forty-four  cases  out  of  seventy-one  it  is  joined  w^ith 
life,  making  life  eternal  and  life  everlasting.  In 
fifteen  cases  it  is  used  to  express  the  eternity  of 
God,  the  endless  duration  of  the  heavenly  w^orld, 
the  eternity  of  the  Spirit,  the  kingdom  of  Christ, 
and  such  endless  objects,  making  in  all  fifty-nine 
texts  in  which  it  is  used,  where  it  clearly  expresses 
endless  duration.  This  leaves  but  twelve  cases  in 
which  the  word  is  used;  and  in  seven  cases  out  of 
the  twelve  it  is  applied  to  the  punishment  of  the 
wicked,  with  nothing  in  the  connection  to  limit  its 
sense,  but  much  which  requires  that  it  be  under- 
stood in  its  full  sense  of  endless.  There  are  five 
texts  in  which  it  is  used  in  a  restricted  sense.  In 
this  general  analysis  of  the  use  of  the  word  we 
have  the  proportion  of  sixty-six  to  five;  that  is, 
the  word  is  used  sixty-six  times  to  express  endless 

18 


274  UNIVERSAL  BESTORATION   ■ 

duration,  and  five  times  in  a  restricted  sense.  "  An 
appeal  is  taken  to  your  good  sense  if  the  fact  that 
the  word  is  used  in  a  limited  sense  five  times,  while 
it  is  used  sixty-six  times  in  an  endless  sense,  can 
justify  humanity  in  grounding  its  eternal  interests 
upon  the  assumption  that  the  word  aionian,  eter- 
nal and  everlasting,  does  not  express  endless  dura- 
tion." 

In  carrying  this  investigation  still  further,  it 
will  be  seen  that  the  connections  in  which  the 
words  (aionian)  eternal  and  everlasting  are  em- 
ployed only  strengthen  the  idea  of  endless  dura- 
tion. 

^'  If  thy  hand  or  thy  foot  oftend  thee,  cut  them 
ofl*,  and  cast  them  from  thee :  it  is  better  for  thee 
to  enter  into  life  halt  or  maimed,  rather  than  hav- 
ing two  hands  or  two  feet  to  be  cast  into  [aionian] 
everlasting  fire."  (Matt,  xviii.  8.)  JSTow  turn  to 
Matthew  xxv.  41 :  "  Then  shall  he  say  also  unto 
them  on  the  left  hand.  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed, 
into  [aionian']  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels."  In  this  last  text  we  have 
the  sending  away  of  the  wicked  standing  immedi- 
ately in  connection  with  the  reception  of  the  right- 
eous, lie  had  just  said,  "  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my 
Father,  inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world."  Into  what  king- 
dom were  these  blessed  ones  received  ?     Into  what 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  275 

place  were  the  wicked  consigned  ?  Who  and  what 
were  meant  by  the  devil  and  his  angels?  Observe 
that  in  both  these  texts  it  is  positively  stated  by 
the  Savior  himself  that  the  wicked  shall  be  pun- 
ished with  {aionian)  everlasting  fire — the  very 
same  word  Christ  and  his  apostles  use  in  reference 
to  the  future  state  of  the  righteous.  And  to  show 
beyond  all  dispute  that  Christ  used  the  worda 
{aionian)  everlasting  fire  in  the  sense  of  endless  du- 
ration, we  will  quote  from  Mark  ix.  43,  44,  where 
the  same  fire  is  spoken  of:  "If  thy  hand  offend 
thee,  cut  it  oft':  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into 
life  maimed,  than  having  two  hands  to  go  into 
hell,  into  the  tire  that  never  shall  he  quenched:  where 
their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched." 
What  the  Savior  calls  (aionian)  everlasting  fire, 
in  the  first  two  texts  quoted,  he  calls  the  fire  that 
never  shall  he  quenched^  in  the  last  text.  What 
language  could  he  have  employed  that  would  more 
forcibly  express  endless  duration?  Aionian — "  ev- 
erlasting fire."  "The  fire  that  never  shall  be 
quenched."  How  long  will  that  fire  continue  which 
is  everlasting?  How  long  will  that  fire  burn  which 
never  shall  he  quenched  f  How  long  will  that  worm 
live  which  dieth  not?  As  long  as  that  everlasting 
fire  continues,  and  as  long  as  that  fire  burns  which 
never  shall  be  quenched,  and  as  long  as  that  worm 
lives  which  never  dies,  so  long  the  punishment  of 


276  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

of  the   wicked  shall  continue.     "The  smoke  of 
their  torment  shall  ascend  forever  and  ever." 

"  Yerily  I  say  unto  you,  All  sins  shall  he  for- 
given unto  the  sons  of  men,  and  hlasphemies 
wherewith  soever  they  shall  hhispheme:  hut  he 
that  shall  hlaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost  hath 
never  forgiveness,  but  is  in  danger  of  (aionian) 
eternal  damnation."  (Mark  iii.  28,  29.)  "And 
whosoever  speaketh  a  word  against  the  Son  ot 
man,  it  shall  he  forgiven  him:  but  whosover 
speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be 
forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  the 
world  to  come."  (Matthew  xii.  32.)  Observe 
how  positive  the  language  of  Christ  is.  He  hath 
never  forgiveness.  He  shall  not  be  forgiven,  neither 
in  this  iDorld,  neither  in  the  world  to  come.  When 
will  that  man  be  forgiven  that  hath  not  forgiveness, 
neither  in  this  world  nor  in  the  world  to  come? 
It  does  not  matter  what  position  Universalists  take 
on  these  texts.  If  they  say  it  means  this  age  and 
the  age  to  come,  or  this  (Jewish)  dispensation,  or 
the  Christian  dispensation  to  come,  it  will  not 
change  the  force  of  the  language.  If  the  Savior 
had  said  that  the  blasphemer  should  not  be  for- 
given in  this  world,  age,  or  dispensation,  but 
should  be  forgiven  in  the  world,  age,  or  dispensa- 
tion to  come,  it  might  have  relieved  them  of  much 
trouble.     But  he  says  neither  in  this  world,  neither 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  277 

in  the  world  to  come.  If  then  he  hath  never  for- 
giveness, neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  the 
w  )rid  to  come,  when  will  he  be  forgiven?  In 
wiicit  age,  or  worlds  or  disj)ensation  will  he  be  for- 
given? 

Mr.  Guild,  author  of  "  The  Universalist  Book  of 
Reference,"  page  306,  says:  "It  simply  signified 
that  such  a  one  would  not  be  likely  to  receive 
forgiveness  or  amendment  in  that  age."  This  is 
putting  the  matter  very  softly.  But  suppose  we 
accept  this  as  the  true  meaning  of  the  text.  What 
then?  Why,  it  proves  that  such  a  one  did  not 
receive  forgiveness  in  that  (Jewish)  age ;  and  as  he 
was  not  to  he  forgiven  in  the  (gospel)  age  to  come, 
he  is  not  forgiven  yet.  When,  then,  will  he  he 
forgiven  ?  Is  there  to  be  another  age  or  dispensa- 
tion ?  If  so,  the  Scriptures  know  nothing  about 
it.  Jesus  said  such  a  one  is  in  danger  of  eternal 
damnation,  aionian  kriseas,  eternal  condemnation 
or  punishment.  He  hath  never  forgiveness,  "  nei- 
ther in  this  world,  neither  in  the  world  to  come." 
This  includes  all  duration — world  without  end. 
No  man  can  show  a  time  or  place  when  the  blas- 
phemer will  be  forgiven.  If  it  should  be  admitted 
that  this  world  and  the  world  to  come  do  mean  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  dispensation,  nothing  would 
be  gained  to  Universalism.  It  would  prove  that 
those  who  committed  this  sin  in  the  days  of  Christ, 


278  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

which  is  now  more  than  eighteen  hundred  years 
ago,  are  not  forgiven  ;  and  as  the  Cliristian  dispen- 
sation will  continue  until  the  resurrection,  and  as 
these  sinners  are  not  to  be  forgiven  during  the 
Christian  dispensation,  it  follows  that  they  never 
will  be  forgiven.  The  Scriptures  know  nothing 
about  an  age  or  dispensation  of  forgiveness  be- 
yond the  resurrection. 

Every  effort  that  Universalist  authors  make  to 
turn  aside  the  force  of  these  passages  only  involves 
their  system  in  greater  difficulties.  As  has  been 
shown,  they  hold  and  teach  that  this  life  is  a  state 
of  retribution;  that  every  man  is  fully  punished 
in  this  life  for  all  the  sin  he  commits ;  that  no  man 
can  sow  in  one  field  and  reap  in  another.  And  as 
this  world  and  the  world  to  come  mean  this  a£:e 
or  dispensation  and  that  age  or  dispensation  to 
come,  how,  then,  is  the  blasphemer  against  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  be  fully  punished  in  this  life  for  all 
the  sin  he  commits  ? — since  no  man  lives  long 
enough  to  fill  up  the  past  and  the  present  age  or 
dispensation.  And  if  this  were  even  possible,  the 
difficulty  is  still  not  removed ;  for  he  is  not  to  be 
forgiven  in  either  age  or  dispensation.  He  must 
enter  upon  a  third  age  or  dispensation  before  he 
can  be  forgiven  ;  and  as  the  Scriptures  know  noth- 
ing about  such  an  age  or  dispensation  of  forgive- 
ness, Universalists  themselves  render  forgiveiiess 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  279 

impossible.  The  plain  meaning  of  the  text  is  just 
what  Jesus  said  :  "He  shall  not  be  forgiven,  nei- 
ther in  this  world,  neither  in  the  loorld  to  come. 

"Seehig  it  is  a  righteous  thing  with  God  to  rec- 
ompense tribulation  to  them  that  trouble  you; 
and  to  you  who  are  troubled  rest  with  us,  when 
the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with 
his  mighty  angels,  in  iiaming  fire  taking  venge- 
ance in  them  that  know  not  God,  and  that  obey 
not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ:  who 
shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory 
of  his  power;  when  he  shall  come  to  be  glorified 
in  his  saints,  and  to  be  admired  in  all  them  that 
believe."  (II.  Thessalonians,  i.  6-10.)  In  this 
passage  we  have:  1.  The  manner  of  his  coming — 
"m  flaming  fireJ^  2.  Who  shall  accompany 
him.^—^' his  mighty  angels  J'  3.  What  he  will 
do  when  he  comes,  (a.)  He  will  take  vengeance 
on  them  that  obey  not  the  gospel,  (b.)  He  will 
punish  with  (aionian)  everlasting  destruction  those 
who  obey  not  the  gospel  of  Christ,  (c.)  He 
shall  be  glorified  in  his  saints,  and  admired  in  all 
that  believe.  All  this  is  to  take  place  when  the 
Lord  Jesus  is  revealed  from  heaven  with  his 
mighty  angels.  [N'othing  has  ever  occurred  that 
will  answer  to  this  description,  and  hence  it  must 
b3  yet  in  the  future.     The  everlasting  destruction 


280  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

which  is  threatened  against  the  disobedient  is  to 
be  inflicted  when  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  revealed 
from  heaven,  in  flaming  fire.  If  the  word  (aionian) 
everlasting  is  not  applied  to  destruction,  for  the 
purpose  of  describing  its  duration,  it  would  be 
difl&cult  to  understand  its  meaning.  Webster  de- 
fines the  word  destruction  to  be  the  breaking  up  of 
a  whole  into  parts ;  loulling  down;  ruin.  Accord- 
ing to  this  rendering  of  the  word,  the  meaning  of 
the  passage  would  be  that  the  wicked  shall  be 
punished  with  (aionian)  everlasting  ruin;  and  this 
is  to  take  place  when  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  re- 
vealed from  heaven  in  flaming  fire. 

"Even  as  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  the  cities 
about  them  in  like  manner,  giving  themselves  over 
to  fornication,  and  going  after  strange  flesh,  are 
set  forth  for  an  example,  suflering  the  vengeance 
of  [aionian']  eternal  fire."  (Jude  7.)  It  would  be 
difficult  to  conceive  how  the  writer  could  have  em- 
ployed stronger  language  to  prove  future  endless 
punishment.  "  Suflering  the  vengeance  of  eternal 
fire."  Dr.  Clarke  says  that  the  words  signify  "  an 
eternally  destructive  fire."  Take  the  history  of 
those  cities,  of  their  extreme  wickedness.  They 
had  given  themselves  over  to  fornication,  and  had 
gone  after  strange  flesh.  They  had  become  so 
desperately  wicked  that  not  even  ten  righteous 
persons  could  be  found  there.     God  sent  and  re- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMLNED.  281 

moved  Lot  from  their  midst,  and  then  swept  them 
away.  If  Universalism  be  true,  he  took  them  to 
heaven,  because  they  had  become  too  wicked  to 
remain  on  earth.  But  Jude  expressed  himself 
very  strangely  for  a  Universalist  preacher.  After 
describing  their  wickedness,  and  alluding  to  their 
overthrow,  he  closes  by  saying  they  "  are  set  forth 
for  an  example,  suffering  the  vengeance  of  eternal 
fire,"  showing  in  the  most  positive  manner  what 
God  will  do  to  such  transgressors. 

If  the  wicked  are  not  punished  at  all  after 
death,  or  if  that  punishment  is  limited,  is  it  not 
most  remarkable  that  Christ  and  his  apostles 
constantly  employ  terms  to  express  the  future 
state  of  the  righteous  which  all  Christians  have 
understood  to  mean  endless  duration,  and  then  in 
the  same  connection,  without  any  qualification, 
employ  the  same  terms  to  express  the  duration 
of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  when  in  the  one 
case  it  is  to  be  understood  as  expressing  endless 
duration,  and  in  the  other  limited  time. 

A  comparison  of  these  terms  and  phrases  ma^-^ 
assist  us  in  better  understanding  it.  Take  the 
words  used  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  to  express 
the  duration  of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked: 
"Everlasting  punishment."  "They  shall  never 
be  forgiven,  neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  the 
world  to  come."     "  They  are  in  danger  of  eternal 


282  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

damnation."  ^^  Their  worm  dieth  not."  "  The  fire  is 
not  quenched."  "The  smoke  of  tlieir  torment 
shall  ascend  forever  and  ever."  "  They  shall  not 
see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  shall  abide  upon 
them."  "  They  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting 
destruction.'''  "  They  shall  go  away  into  everlast- 
ing punishment."  "  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed, 
into  everlasting  lire."  "  Suffering  the  vengeance 
of  eternal  fire."  "  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins :  where 
I  am  ye  can  not  come."  All  these  terms  and 
phrases  are  used  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  to  sig- 
nify not  only  the  future  state  of  the  wicked,  but 
the  duration  of  their  punishment.  There  arc  no 
words  in  any  language  under  the  heavens  that 
more  clearly  express  endless  duration  than  those 
used  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  to  express  the  du- 
ration of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked.  If  these 
terms  do  not  express  endless  duration,  it  would  be 
exceedingly  difficult  to  tell  in  what  other  terms  the 
Savior  promised  endless  life  to  any  one.  The  word 
aion  is  frequently  used  in  the  IN'ew  Testament  to 
express  endless  duration,  but  is  not  so  frequently 
used  in  this  sense. 

It  has  been  claimed  that  the  word  aidias  is  a 
much  stronger  word  than  aionian.  Suppose  it  is; 
still  nothing  would  be  gained  by  that.  It  is  only 
used  twice  in  the  ISTew  Testament.  It  occurs  first 
in  Romans  i.  20 :  "  His  [aidias']  eternal  power  and 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  283 

Godhead."  Here  beyond  a  doubt  it  is  used  to 
express  absolute  eternity.  But  it  expresses  no 
more  tlian  the  word  aioyiian  in  Romans  xvi.  26 : 
^'The  \_aionian']  everlasting  God."  This  as  certain- 
ly expresses  absolute  eternity  as  the  word  aidias 
does  in  Romans  i.  20.  It  occurs  again  in  Jude  6, 
in  reference  to  the  angels  who  kept  not  their  first 
estate.  If  it  be  insisted  that  this  is  a  stronger  word, 
it  would  prove  the  endless  punishment  of  the  an- 
gels that  fell;  and  this  would  be  of  no  special  ad- 
vantage to  Universalism ;  for  in  Matthew  xxv.  41 
it  is  said,  "Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  \aion- 
ian]  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and 
his  angels." 

Then  we  have  the  word  akatalutou,  which  may 
be  found  in  Hebrews  vii.  16  :  "  Who  is  made,  not 
after  the  law  of  a  carnal  commandment,  but  after 
the  power  of  an  \_akataluioii]  endless  life."  This 
word  occurs  but  once  in  the.JSTew  Testament.  If 
akatalutou  and  aidias  are  the  only  words  employed 
by  Christ  and  the  apostles  to  express  endless  dura- 
tion, how  can  any  man  prove  the  endless  happi- 
ness of  the  saints  ?     It  can  not  be  done. 

Universalists,  in  attempting  to  explain  away  the 
proper  meaning  of  the  word  aionian  every  time  it 
is  used  in  relation  to  the  future  destiny  of  the 
wicked,  do  not  seem  to  know  that  they  are  ex- 
plahiiug  away  every  word  that  is  used  to  express 


284  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

the  endless  happiness  of  the  saints,  thus  leaving 
the  whole  race  of  man  without  God  and  without 
hope  in  the  world.  If  these  terms  were  used  by 
Christ  and  his  apostles  to  express  endless  duration 
when  applied  to  God  and  the  future  state  of  the 
righteous,  by  what  law  of  language  are  we  to  limit 
their  signification  every  time  they  are  used  to  ex- 
press the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked?  They 
are  used  in  the  same  connection  to  qualify  the 
future  state  of  the  righteous,  and  to  qualify  the 
future  state  of  the  wicked;  and  there  is  nothing 
in  the  structure  of  the  sentences  to  limit  the  sig- 
nification in  the  one  case  more  than  there  is  in  the 
other.  "  These  shall  go  away  into  (aionian)  ever- 
lasting punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life 
(aionian)  eternal." 

Let  me  present  this  argument  in  a  little  difi:erent 
form.  Some  of  3^ou  are  trying  to  be  Christians. 
In  the  hours  of  temptation  and  trial  you  have 
once  and  again  turned  to  the  word  of  God  for 
comfort  and  consolation.  In  that  word  you  have 
found  many  words  of  promise;  such,  for  example, 
as  these:  ''Everlasting  life."  "Eternal  life." 
"An  eternal  weight  of  glory."  A  house  not  made 
with  hands  "eternal  in  the  heavens."  In  the 
world  to  come,  "eternal  life."  Tell  me,  Chris- 
tian, do  you  believe  upon  the  strength  of  such 
promises  that  the  future  life  of  the  righteous  will 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  285 

be  endless?  I  doubt  if  there  is  or  ever  was  a 
Christian  on  earth  wlio  did  not  understand 
these  promises,  to  express  endless  duration. 
In  that  faith  the}^  lived,  and  in  that  faith  they 
died. 

Now  turn  to  the  other  side.  Examine  the 
words  used  to  express  the  future  state  of  the 
wicked.  "Everlasting  punishment."  ''They  are 
in  danger  of  eternal  damnation."  "  Depart  from 
me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire."  "  Suffering 
the  vengeance  of  eternal  tire."  "  They  shall  be 
punished  with  everlasting  destruction."  "They 
shall  never  be  forgiven."  "  The  fire  shall  not  be 
quenched."  "They  shall  perish."  "They  shall 
not  see  life."  "  They  shall  go  away  into  everlast- 
ing punishment."  The  words  used  to  express  the 
future  happiness  of  the  righteous  are  no  stronger 
than  those  employed  to  express  the  future  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked.  If  we  say  that  the  future 
glory  of  the  righteous  is  endless,  upon  the  same 
authority  we  say  that  the  future  punishment  of 
the  wicked  is  endless. 

If  the  conclusion  reached  in  this  chapter  is  not 
in  harmony  with  the  word  of  God,  we  ask  an  ex- 
planation of  the  following  points :  (1.)  What  is 
the  meaning  the  word  "pen's A,"  as  it  occurs  in 
John  iii.  16?  (2.)  If  those  who  believe  in  Jesus 
Christ  are  to  have  everlasting  life,  what  are  those 


286  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

to  receive  who  do  not  believe  in  him,  and  who 
die  in  their  sins?  (3.)  If  the  (aionian)  everlast- 
ing punishment  of  the  wicked  (in  Matthew  xxv. 
46)  is  not  endless,  what  is  to  he  the  duration  of 
the  life  (aionian)  eternal  of  the  righteous?  (4.) 
Do  the  words  eternal  and  everlasting  express 
duration  ?  If  so,  how  long?  (5.)  By  what  words, 
in  the  l^ew  Testament,  is  the  future  endless  hap- 
piness of  the  righteous  promised?  (6.)  What 
and  where  is  that  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels,  into  which  the  wicked  are  to 
be  cast?  (Matthew  xxv.  41.)  (7.)  What  and 
where  is  that  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched ; 
and  that  worm  that  dieth  not?  (Mark  ix.  43,  44.) 
(8.)  What  did  Jesus  mean  when  he  said  that  the 
blasphemer  is  in  "  danger  of  eternal  damnation  ? " 
(Mark  iii.  28,  29.)  (9.)  When  will  those  be  for- 
given that  shall  never  be  forgiven,  neither  in  this 
world,  neither  in  the  world  to  come?  (Matthew 
xii.  32.)  (10.)  What  did  Paul  mean  when  he 
said  that  the  wicked  should  be  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction?  When  is  this  to  occur? 
(II.  Thessalonians  i.  6-10.)  (11.)  What  did  Jude 
mean  when  he  said  of  the  Sodomites  that  they 
were  set  for  an  example,  suffering  the  vengeance 
of  eternal  fire?  (12.)  If  Christ  and  his  apostles 
were  all  Universalists,  why  did  they  employ  the 
saixie  words  to  express  the  future  punishment  of 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  287 

the  wicked  that  they  did  to  express  the  future 
happiness  of  the  righteous,  and  that,  too,  in  the 
very  same  connection?  (1'^.)  If  all  the  everlast- 
ing, eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  endured 
in  this  life,  is  not  all  the  everlasting,  eternal  life 
of  the  righteous  enjoyed  in  this  life?  (14.)  By 
what  terms  in  the  Bible  can  the  future  endless 
happiness  of  the  righteous  be  proved  ? 

We  are  hastening  to  the  world  of  spirits.  The 
veil  that  hides  from  us  the  world  to  come  will  soon 
be  lifted,  and  we  shall  kujow  what  the  Savior  meant 
when  he  said,  '^  The  pure  in  heart  shall  see  God." 
Paul,  in  Hebrews  vi.  2,  speaks  of  the  "  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead  and  of  eternal  judgment."  To 
this  solemn,  awful  scene  we  are  fast  approaching. 
This  eternal  judgment  is  placed  b-eyond  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  and  hence  must  be  in  the 
eternal  world.  "  The  original  is  krimatas  aionian, 
literally,  judgment  eternal."  Header,  let  me  en- 
treat you  not  to  risk  your  eternal  all  on  a  theory 
that  is  not  found  in  the  word  of  God.  As  has 
been  shown,  Universalism  rejects  almost  every  fun- 
damental doctrine  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  in  the  face  of  the  most  positive  declarations 
of  the  Bible  promises  endless  happiness  to  all  men, 
no  matter  how  they  live  nor  how  they  die.  The 
worst  man  that  lives  or  ever  did  live  will  be  as 
happy  in  the  resurrection  as  the  most  devout 
Christian.     This  is  Universalism. 


288  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

THE    FUTURE    STATE    OF    THE    WICKED  (CONTINUED). 

To  assist  in  understanding  the  passages  of  script- 
ure to  be  examined  in  this  chapter,  it  will  be  nec- 
essary to  state  distinctly  the  points  established  in 
the  live  preceding  chapters.  1.  It  was  shown  that 
the  second  coming  of  Christ  is  yet  in  the  future. 
2.  At  the  time  of  his  coming  he  will  judge  the 
world.  3.  There  will  be  a  manifest  distinction  in 
the  resurrection.  4.  Connected  with  tho  general 
judgment  there  will  be  a  separation  between  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked.  5.  The  future  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked  will  be  endless.  All  these 
points  Universalists  deny. 

In  further  confirmation  of  these  several  points 
of  doctrine,  and  especially  the  last  one  named,  I 
shall  call  attention  to  certain  passages  of  scripture 
the  meaning  of  which  can  scarcely  admit  of  a 
single  doubt. 

*'I  said  therefore  unto  you,  that  ye  shall  die  in 
your  sins :  for  if  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye 
shall  die  in  your  sins."  (John  viii.  24.)  This  text 
teaches:  (1.)  That  it  is  possible  for  men  to  die  in 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  289 

their  sins.  (2.)  All  who  do  not  believe  in  Jesus 
Christ  do  die  in  their  sins.  (3.)  Those  who  die  in 
their  sins  can  not  go  to  Jesus.  The  Savior  was 
talking  about  his  death  and  telling  the  unbelieving 
Jews  that  he  was  going  away  and  that  they  could 
not  follow  him,  but  should  die  in  their  sins.  Aft- 
erward, in  John  xiii.  33-36,  when  talking  to  his 
disciples,  he  told  them  that  they  could  not  follow 
him  now  but  should  come  afterward.  Observe 
the  difference.  He  said  to  the  unbelieving  Jews 
that  they  should  not  follow  him,  and  they  could 
not  come  where  he  was,  assigning  as  the  reason 
that  they  did  not  believe  in  him,  and  consequently 
should  die  in  their  sins.  He  said  to  his  disciples 
that  they  should  not  follow  him  then,  but  should 
come  afterward. 

The  fact  is,  thousands  have  lived  and  died  who 
did  not  believe  in  Jesus  Christ ;  and  if  the  words  of 
the  Savior  are  to  be  taken  as  authority  they  died 
in  their  sins.  Jesus  said,  "  If  ye  believe  not  that 
I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins."  The  Script- 
ures speak  of  living  in  Christ,  of  dying  in  Christ, 
and  of  being  raised  in  Christ;  but  they  nowhere 
inform  us  that  those  who  die  in  their  sins  will  be 
raised  in  Christ,  or  that  they  ever  will  come  to 
Christ  and  be  saved  from  sin  after  death.  The 
Scriptures  keep  up  a  distinction  of  character  in 
life,  in  death,  in  the  resurrection,  and  through  all 

19 


290  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

eternity.  But  in  spite  of  this  manifest  distinction 
of  character,  Universalist  authors  say  that  all  who 
die  in  their  sins  will  be  made  holy  in  the  resurrec- 
tion. They  affirm  this,  but  have  not  a  single  text 
in  God's  w^ord  to  sustain  them.  The  Scriptures 
teach  that  there  shall  be  a  resurrection,  both  of 
the  just  and  unjust;  that  there  shall  be  a  resurrec- 
tion to  life  and  a  resurrection  to  damnation;  that 
the  unbelieving  shall  have  their  part  in  the  lake  of 
iire,  which  is  the  second  death  ;  but  nowhere  is  it 
said  that  the  unbelieving  who  die  in  their  sins  will 
ever  be  made  holy  and  happy.  When  we  consid- 
er the  vast  number  who  have  died  in  unbelief  and 
sin,  it  would  seem  most  reasonable  to  conclude 
that  if  all  these  are  to  be  made  holy  after  death, 
the  Scriptures  would  say  something  about  it.  The 
only  reasonable  conclusion  is  this :  All  who  die  in 
unbelief  and  sin  will  forever  remain  in  sin.  *'  These 
shall  go  away  into  [aionian]  everlasting  punish- 
ment, but  the  righteous  into  life  [aioniayi]  eternal." 
"Laying  up  in  store  for  themselves  a  good  foun- 
dation against  the  time  to  come,  that  they  may 
lay  hold  on  eternal  life."  (I.  Timothy  vi.  19.) 
In  the  verses  preceding,  Paul  exhorts  them  to  do 
good,  to  be  rich  in  good  works.  But  why  do  thifl? 
Why  lay  up  in  store  a  good  foundation  against  the 
time  to  come?  Are  not  all  men  fully  rewarded 
and  punished  in  this  life?    How  then  can  they  and 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  291 

why  should  they  attempt  to  lay  up  in  store  a  good 
foundation  against  the  time  to  come  ?  Why  should 
they  do  good  in  order  that  they  might  lay  hold  on 
eternal  life,  since  the  wickedest  man  in  the  world 
is  just  as  sure  of  it  as  the  most  devout  Christian? 
Bolingbroke,  Paine,  and  Voltaire,  will  as  certainly 
have  eternal  life  as  Paul.     This  is  Universalism. 

In  the  twelfth  verse  Paul  exhorts  Timothy  to 
"fight  the  good  fight  of  faith,  and  to  lay  hold  on 
eternal  life."  What  did  he  mean  by  this  contest, 
since  all  are  to  fare  alike  in  the  end?  Perhaps 
Paul  could  best  explain  this  himself.  Hear  his 
words  near  the  end  of  his  life.  "I  have  fought  a 
good  fight,  I  have  finished  my  course,  I  have 
kept  the  faith :  henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me 
a  crown  of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord,  the 
righteous  judge,  shall  give  me  at  that  day:  and 
not  to  me  only,  but  unto  all  them  also  that  love 
his  appearing."  Paul  had  something  in  view 
which  was  still  in  the  future — a  crown  of  life, 
which  he  was  to  receive  at  that  day.  But  why 
look  for  a  crown  more  than  anybody  else?  "I 
have  fought  a  good  fight,  I  have  kept  the  faith." 
Herein  is  the  reason  why  he  urged  Timothy  to 
fight  the  good  fight  of  faith,  that  he,  too,  might 
have  a  crown  of  life ;  and  herein  is  the  reason  why 
he  exhorted  them  to  "  lay  up  in  store  a  good  foun- 
dation against  the  time  to  come."     But  many  care 


292  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

for  none  of  these  things.  They  spend  their  whole 
life  in  lighting  against  God  and  his  cause.  They 
die  blaspheming  his  name.  But  if  Universalism 
be  true,  they  shall  have  a  crown  of  life  all  the 
same,  as  though  they  had  fought  the  good  light  of 
faith.  Either  Paul  was  mistaken,  or  Universalism 
is  false.  It  is  utterly  impossible  to  harmonize  the 
teaching  of  Paul  with  the  theory  of  Universalism. 
"  And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand 
before  God;  and  the  books  were  opened:  and 
another  book  was  opened,  which  is  the  book  of 
life :  and  the  dead  were  judged  out  of  those  things 
which  Vv^cre  written  in  the  books,  according  to 
their  works.  And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead 
which  were  in  it;  and  death  and  hell  delivered  up 
the  dead  which  were  in  them:  and  they  were 
judged  every  man  according  to  their  works.  And 
death  and  hell  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire. 
This  is  the  second  death.  And  whosoever  was 
not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was  cast  into 
the  lake  of  fire."  (Eevelation  xx.  12-15.)  This 
passage  was  examined  when  considering  the  doc- 
trine of  a  future  general  judgment,  but  there  are 
a  few  points  which  should  be  noted  in  this  con- 
nection. (1.)  The  fact  is  stated  that  there  is  a 
time  when  all  shall  stand  before  God.  They  shall 
come  from  the  sea,  from  death,  and  hell.  (2.) 
All  are  to  be  judged,  every  man  according  to  his 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED,  29-j 

works.  This  accords  with  what  Paul  »ay9  in 
E-onians  xiv.  12,  "Every  one  of  us  shall  give  ac- 
count of  himself  to  God."  And  with  II.  Corin- 
thians V.  10,  "For  we  must  all  appear  before  the 
judgment  seat  of  Christ;  that  every  one  may  re- 
ceive the  things  done  in  his  body,  according  to  that 
he  hath  done,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad."  (3.) 
All  whose  names  are  not  found  written  in  the  book 
of  life  are  to  be  cast  into  a  lake  of  lire.  It  is  no- 
where said  that  this  lake  of  lire  will  ever  be  de- 
stroyed ;  it  is  that  lire  which  Jesus  says  shall  not 
be  quenched.  (4.)  Into  this  lake  of  lire  the 
devil  is  to  be  cast,  and  tormented  forever  and  ever. 
There  is  just  as  much  scripture  to  prove  the  res- 
toration of  the  devil  and  his  angels  as  there  is  to 
prove  the  final  restoration  of  those  who  are  cast 
with  him  into  this  lake  of  fire. 

In  connection  with  the  above,  consider  the  sev- 
enth and  eighth  verses  of  the  twenty -first  chapter 
of  Revelation.  "  He  that  overcometh  shall  inherit 
all  things ;  and  I  will  be  his  God,  and  he  shall  be 
my  son.  But  the  fearful,  and  unbelieving,  and 
the  abominable,  and  murderers,  and  whoremongers, 
and  sorcerers,  and  idolaters,  and  all  liars,  shall  have 
their  part  in  the  lake  wliich  burnetii  with  fire  and 
brimstone :  which  is  the  second  death."  Here,  ob- 
serve, there  are  two  classes  of  persons.  The  one 
class  is  to  inherit  all  things,  and  be  reckoned  as  tiie 


294  UNIVERSAL   RESTORATION 

sons  of  God.  The  other  class  is  to  have  their  part  in 
the  lake  of  tire.  All  whose  names  are  not  found 
written  in  the  book- of  life  are  to  be  cast  into  this 
lake  of  lire.  Do  the  Scriptures  warrant  us  in  the 
belief  that  the  murderer,  "the  unbeliever,  and  the 
liar  is  to  fare  just  the  same  as  those  whose  names 
are  written  in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life  ?  If  this  is  so, 
what  is  meant  by  the  lake  of  fire  and  the  secoixl 
death?  The  language  employed  in  the  Scriptures 
to  prove  the  existence  of  a  future  endless  heaven 
is  no  stronger  or  more  positive  than  the  language 
used  to  prove  the  existence  of  a  future  endless  hell. 
The  words  used  to  describe  the  future  endless  hap- 
piness of  the  righteous  are  no  stronger  and  no 
more  positive  than  those  used  to  prove  the  future 
endless  punishment  of  the  wicked. 

"For  he  that  soweth  to  the  flesh  shall  of  the 
flesh  reap  corruption;  but  he  that  soweth  to  the 
Spirit  shall  of  the  Spirit  reap  life  everlasting." 
(Galatians  vi.  8.)  Here  we  have  the  effects  of  two 
widely  different  causes.  What  Paul  means  by  life 
everlasting  he  fully  explains  in  the  next  verse: 
^'^ Let  us  not  be  weary  in  well-doing:  for  .in  due 
season  we  shall  reap,  if  we  faint  not."  This  fully 
accords  with  the  language  of  Christ  in  Matthew 
xxiv.  13:  ''But  he  that  shall  endure  to  the  end, 
the  same  shall  be  saved."     The  reaping   shall   be 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  295 

according  to  the  sowing.  What  Paul  means  by 
life  everlasting  is  the  life  to  come. 

"But  he  that  soweth  to  the  flesh  shall  of  the 
flesh  reap  corruption;"  that  is,  those  who  live  in 
sin  and  follow  their  sensual  appetites  shall  reap 
corruption.  For  "  whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  tliat 
shall  he  also  reap."  Notice,  also,  that  the  reaping 
is  in  the  future ;  and  as  sure  as  those  which  sow  to 
the  Spirit  shall  reap  life  everlasting,  so  sure  shall 
those  reap  corruption  w^ho  sow  to  the  flesh.  By 
corruption  the  apostle  can  not  mean  the  mere 
dissolution  of  the  body,  for  that  befalls  all  alike, 
whether  they  sow  to  the  flesh  or  to  the  Spirit. 

There  is  nothing  that  more  exactly  accords  with 
our  highest  notions  of  justice  than  that  a  man 
should  reap  what  he  sows,  or  that  he  should  be 
rewarded  according  to  his  works;  and  there  is  no 
truth  more  clearly  taught  in  the  word  of  God  than 
that  "  God  will  render  to  every  man  according 
to  his  deeds."  (Romans  ii.  6-9.)  But  when  will 
this  be  done?  In  the  sixteenth  verse  Paul  tells  us 
that  this  shall  be  "in  the  day  when  God  shall 
judge  the  secrets  of  men  by  Jesus  Christ,"  accord- 
ing to  the  gospel.  Beyond  this  day  of  reckoning 
I  know  of  no  probation  or  change.  Of  those  who 
continue  in  sin,  as  many  do,  up  to  the  last  mo- 
ment of  life;  who  have  gone  through  the  world 
sowing    to    the    flesh;     enter   the    future    world 


296  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

without  a  moment's  thought  of  God  or  anything 
good,   the   solemn   words    of   Paul    are,     "They 
shall  reap  corruption."     While  on  the  other  hand, 
those  who  have  gone  through  this  world  sowing 
to  the  Spirit  shall  enter  the  future  world  and  reap 
life  everlasting.     Can  it  be  that  all  shall  reap  the 
same  harvest  ?     Why,  then,  this  distinction  ?    Why 
not  say  that  all  shall  reap  life  everlasting,  no  mat- 
ter what  they  sowed  ?     According  to  Universalism, 
it  will  make  no  difference.     If  a  man  choose   to 
cheat,  lie,  murder,  and  steal,  he  will  reap  the  same 
harvest  that  the  most  devout  Christian  will  reap. 
"  He  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life ; 
but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him:"     (John  iii. 
36.)     Under  this  text  consider  the  case  of  such  as 
believe   not, — and   there  are   thousands  of  them. 
The  passage  says  they  "  shall  not  see  life  " — they 
shall  die  in  their  sins.     What  more?     "  The  wrath 
of  God  abideth  on  him."     This  is  equivalent   to 
what  Mark  says  in  xvi.  16:  "He  that  believeth 
not  shall  be    damned."     Do  the  Scriptures  any- 
where teach  that  the  wrath  of  God  will  ever  be 
removed  from  those  who  die  in  unbelief?     I  afiirin 
that  there  is  no  such  passage  in  the  Bible.     This 
{orge)  wrath  or  displeasure  abides.     They  are  cut 
off  from  life ;  that  is,  they  shall  not  see  it,  and  are 
placed  under  the  abiding  wrath  or  displeasure  of 
God.     Could  language  be  more  specific  ? 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  297 

In  the  third  chapter  of  II.  Peter,  only  a  part  of 
which  will  be  quoted,  the  apostle  says  that  the 
heavens  and  the  earth  are  kept  in  store,  reserved 
unto  fire  against  the  day  of  judgment;  that  the 
day  of  the  Lord  shall  come  as  a  thief  in  the  night ; 
the  heavens  shall  pass  away,  and  the  elements  shall 
melt.  When  is  this  to  occur  ?  Peter  says  they  are 
reserved  unto  tire  against  the  day  of  judgment. 
What  else  is  connected  with  that  day  ?  The  apos- 
tle puts  the  day  of  judgment  and  the  perdition  of 
ungodly  men  at  the  same  time.  Webster  defines 
the  word  perdition  to  mean  entire  loss,  utter  destruc- 
tion and  rain.  The  meaning  of  the  passage,  then, 
would  be  this :  1.  There  will  be  a  future  general 
judgment.  2.  The  earth  and  elements  shall  be 
dissolved  by  fire.  3.  When  this  great  and  terrible 
day  shall  come,  the  ungodly  shall  be  overthrown 
and  utterly  rained.  If  by  "  the  perdition  of  un- 
godly men"  the  apostle  does  not  mean  their  utter 
ruin,  then  words  are  no  index  to  ideas.  Can  it  be 
that  he  meant  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation 
of  the  ungodly?  If  he  did,  he  was  most  unfortu- 
nate in  the  selection  of  a  word.  Who,  in  speak- 
ing of  .the  ultimate  holiness  and  happiness  of  any 
class  of  men,  would  think  of  employing  such  lan- 
guage ?  Universalists  say  they  believe  in  the  ulti- 
mate holiness  of  all  men.  Would  they  le  willing 
to  substitute  perdition  for  holiness  ?     Would  they 


298  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

be  willing  to  affirm  that  the  Scriptures  teach  the 
ultimate  perdition  of  all  men  ? 

The  eleventh  verse  will  assist  us  in  more  fully 
comprehending  the  meaning  of  the  apostle.  ''  See- 
ing then  that  all  these  things  shall  he  dissolved, 
what  manner  of  persons  ought  ye  to  be  in  all  holy 
conversation  and  godliness."  This  is  a  solemn  ex- 
hortation or  warning  to  be  ready  for  that  day.  In 
the  fourteenth  verse  he  says,  "  Wherefore,  beloved, 
seeing  that  ye  look  for  such  things,  be  diligent  that 
yQ  may  be  found  of  him  in  peace,  without  spot, 
and  blameless."  Here  we  have  lirst  the  perditii  n 
of  ungodly  men,  and  second  those  who  shall  be 
found  of  him  in  peace,  without  spot,  and  blame- 
less. Here,  again,  we  have  that  same  distinction 
of  character — the  ungodly  and  the  pure  and  spot- 
less. These  characters  are  to  be  distinguished  in 
the  day  of  judgment. 

"He  that  despised  Moses'  law  died  without  mer- 
cy under  two  or  three  witnesses :  of  how  much  sorer 
^punishment,  suppose  ye,  shall  he  be  thought  worth}^, 
who  hath  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and 
hath  counted  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  wherev/ith 
he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing."  (Heb.  x.  28, 29.) 
Those  who  despised  and  rejected  the  law  of  Moses 
died  without  mercy,  "without  any  extenuation  or 
mitigation  of  punishment."  (ISTum.  xv.  30.)  But 
those  who  reject  Christ  shall  be  visited  with  a  sorer 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  299  • 

punishment.  To  reject  the  law  of  Moses  was  a 
trifling  offense  compared  with  the  rejection  of 
Christ;  and  hence,  in  justice,  the  punishment  must 
be  proportioned  to  the  offense.  The  first  offense 
Avas  punished  with  death,  and  the  second  is  to  be 
visited  with  a  punishment  sorer  than  death.  There 
is  no  punishment  in  this  world  that  is  sorer  than 
death ;  hence,  in  the  very  nature  of  things,  a  pun- 
ishment that  is  sorer  than  death  must  be  after 
death.  It  was  a  sin  to  despise  or  reject  the  law  of 
Moses,  and  those  who  did  it  were  punished  with 
death.  It  is  a  greater  sin  to  reject  Christ,  and 
count  his  blood  an  unholy  thing ;  hence  their  pun- 
ishment will  be  vastly  greater. 

There  are  those  who  do  reject  Christ.  They 
call  him  an  impostor,  and  declare  that  his  blood  is 
no  better,  and  has  no  more  merit  in  it  than  the 
blood  of  a  dog ;  and  thus  they  continue  until  death. 
N"ow,  they  are  to  be  visited  with  a  punishment 
sorer  than  death.  What  is  that  punishment  that 
is  sorer  than  death,  and  when  will  it  be  inflicted  ? 

*^He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be 
saved;  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned." 
(Mark  xvi.  16.)  "He  shall  be  saved."  "He  shall 
be  damned."  Here  is  a  salvation  and  a  damnation, 
which  is  yet  in  the  future.  Kow  take  the  case  of  an 
unbeliever, — and  there  are  many  such, — one  who 
continues  in  unbelief  until  he  dies.     The  text  says, 


300  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

in  unmistakable  language,  "  he  shall  he  damned.^* 
But  Universalists  say  he  shall  not  be  damned.  In 
this  they  flatly  contradict  the  words  of  Jesus. 

In  reviewing  the  arguments  ottered  in  this 
chapter,  you  are  invited  to  consider  the  following 
points : 

1.  What  did  Christ  intend  to  teach  when  he 
said  to  the  unbelieving  Jews  (John  viii.  24)  that 
they  should  die  in  their  sins,  and  that  where  he  was 
they  could  not  come? 

2.  "What  did  Paul  mean  when  he  exhorted  nis 
brethren  (I.  Tim.  vi.  19)  to  lay  up  a  good  founda- 
tion ao:ainst  the  time  to  come?  Did  he  mean  to 
teach  that  there  would  be  no  difference  in  the  end 
between  those  who  laid  up  in  store  such  founda- 
tion and  those  who  did  not  ? 

3.  At  what  time  will  the  dead,  small  and  great, 
stand  before  God  ?  (Rev.  xx.)  What  is  meant  by 
every  one  being  judged?  Is  that  lake  of  fire  in 
this  world  or  in  the  world  to  come?  Will  the 
murderers,  liars,  and  abominable  persons  (Eev. 
xxi.)  who  are  to  be  cast  into  the  lake  of  tire  fare 
just  the  same  as  those  who  live  godly  in  Christ 
Jesus?     What  is  meant  by  the  second  death? 

4.  Will  those  who  sow  to  the  flesh  and  those 
who  sow  to  the  Spirit  (Gal.  vi.  8)  reap  the  same 
kind  of  harvest?  Is  there  no  diflerence  between 
reaping  life   everlasting  and   reaping   corruption  ? 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  301 

What  did  Paul  mean  when  he  said,  "  Whatsoever 
a  man  soweth  that  shall  he  also  reap." 

5.  What  meaning  are  we  to  attach  to  Christ's 
words  when  he  said,  in  John  iii.  36,  that  the  un- 
believer should  not  see  life,  and  that  the  wrath  of 
God  should  abide  upon  him  ? 

6.  What  did  Peter  mean  (II.  Peter  iii.  7-12)  by 
the  day  of  judgment  and  the  perdition  of  ungodly 
men  V 

7.  What  ia  that  punishment  of  which  Paul 
speaks  (Heb.  x.  28,29),  which  is  sorer  than  death? 
When  and  where  is  it  to  be  inflicted  ? 

8.  If  those  who  believe  and  are  baptized  (Mark 
xvi.  16)  shall  be  saved,  what  will  the  end  be  of 
those  that  believe  not? 

If  Christ  and  his  apostles  believed  in  the  ulti- 
mate holiness  and  solvation  of  all  men,  why  did 
they  use  words  and  employ  illustrations  that  must 
in  the  very  nature  of  things  lead  the  great  major- 
ity of  Bible  readers  astray  ?  Why  say  of  the  wick- 
ed and  unbelieving  that  they  shall  be  damned; 
they  shall  perish;  they  shall  not  see  life;  the  wrath 
of  God  shall  abide  upon  them ;  they  shall  go  away 
into  everlasting  punishment ;  they  shall  be  cast  in- 
to the  lake  of  fire ;  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the 
fire  is  not  quenched;  they  shall  never  be  forgiven  , 
they  shall  receive  a  punishment  sorer  than  death ; 
they  shall  die  in  their  sins  ?    Did  they  mean  by 


302  UNIVEKSAL  RESTOKATION 

this  that  the  wicked  and  unbelieving  should  be 
eternally  saved? 

If  the  wicked  and  unbelieving  are  to  come  to 
•Christ  and  be  saved  after  death,  why  did  they  not 
somewhere  say  so.  But  there  is  no  such  passage 
in  the  Bible.  In  the  last  chapter  of  the  last  book 
of  the  IsTew  Testament  this  language  may  be  found : 
"He  that  is  unjust, 'let  him  be  unjust  still:  and  he 
which  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still :  and  he  that 
is  righteous  let  him  be  righteous  still:  and  he  thai 
is  holy,  let  him  be  holy  still.  And,  behold,  I  come 
quickly;  and  my  reward  is  with  me,  to  give  every 
man  according  as  his  work  shall  be.'' 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  303 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE    RICH    MAN,    LAZARUS,  AND   JUDAS* 

The  case  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  recorded 
in  Luke  xvi.  19—31,  has  been  c'iscussed  by  so  many 
different  authors  that  it  is  hardly  possible  to  say 
anything  new  upon  it.  Whether  the  narrative  of 
Dives  and  Lazarus  should  be  understood  as  a  par- 
able or  literal  history,  one  thing  must  be  admitted, 
— that  Christ  intended  to  teach  some  great  moral 
lesson.  Of  Christ  it  was  said,  ^'I^ever  man  spake 
like  this  man;"  and  it  would  not  become  the  great- 
est teacher  the  world  ever  had  to  give  a  narrative 
or  speak  a  parable  without  any  lesson  of  instruc- 
tion. It  is  very  generally  admitted  that  the  Jews 
believed  in  a  future  heaven  and  hell.  One  impor- 
tant lesson,  therefore,  that  Christ  intended  to  teach 
was  that  men  have  a  conscious  existence  after 
death.  The  language  is  too  plain  and  positive  to  be 
merely  figurative. 

If  it  be  assumed  that  the  language  is  altogether 
figurative,  and  intended  to  represent  the  Jews  and 
gentiles,  the  following  difiiculties  will  be  in  the 


304  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

way.  It  can  not  represent  the  Jews,  for  they  have 
never  asked  for  the  blessings  of  the  gospel ;  nor 
have  they  at  any  time  asked  the  gentiles  to  seek 
out  their  five  brethren.  If  snch  a  request  would 
at  any  time  come  from  the  Jews,  would  not  Chris- 
tians take  them  the  gospel  at  once?  Have  the 
Jews  ever  asked  for  help  and  been  denied?  Is 
there  anything  to  prevent  the  Christians  from  re- 
lieving the  Jews?  Then  there  was  a  gulf,  and  it 
was  fixed.  It  could  not  be  passed  over.  Abra- 
ham said  that  such  as  might  desire  to  cross  this 
gulf  could  not.  Is  the  conversion  of  a  Jew  impos- 
sible? Were  not  all  the  apostles  Jews?  Were 
not  the  five  hundred  brethren  who  saw  the  Lord 
at  one  time  all  Jews  ?  Were  not  the  converts  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost  Jews  ?  Are  there  not  many 
converted  Jews  in  the  Christian  church  at  this 
time?  There  is  no  impassable  gulf  between  the 
Jews  and  the  gentiles.  It  has  been  crossed  a 
thousand  times.  But  the  gulf  of  which  Christ 
speaks  is  fixed  and  impassable.  It  can  not  be  crossed 
either  way.  The  fact  is,  the  Jews  have  never  been 
in  the  condition  which  is  represented  by  the  rich 
man. 

If  the  loss  sustained  by  the  rich  man  is  intended 
to  represent  the  loss  of  the  spiritual  privileges  of 
the  Jews,  and  the  case  of  Lazarus  to  represent  the 
gathering  in  of  the  gentiles,  then  it  would  have 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  305 

been  far  more  complete  if  the  Savior  had  placed 
the  beggar  in  the  rich  man's  house,  and  the  rich 
man  lying  at  his  gate. 

It  were  better,  perhaps,  to  examine  more  care- 
fully the  language  employed  in  the  narrative. 
The  rich  man  died  and  was  buried,  and  in  (hades) 
hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments.  The 
word  hades  may  be  found  eleven  times  in  the  JSTew 
Testament.  It  is  translated  hell  ten  times,  and 
grave  once.  Hades  signifies  the  invisible  or  un- 
seen world,  the  place  or  abode  of  the  spirit  aftei 
death.  Peter,  when  quoting  from  one  of  the 
psalms,  concerning  Christ,  says,  "Thou  wilt  not 
leave  my  soul  in  (hades)  hell,  neither  wilt  thou 
sufier  thine  holy  one  to  see  corruption."  Here 
the  word  evidently  means  the  place  of  the  de- 
parted. It  does  not  mean  the  grave,  for  that  is 
included  in  the  word  "  corruption."  IN'ow,  in  or- 
der to  ascertain  more  fully  the  condition  of  the 
soul  of  Christ,  in  hades,  or  the  place  of  departed 
spirits,  we  need  only  refer  to  his  own  language  to 
the  thief  while  on  the  cross :  "  This  day  shalt  thou 
be  with  me  in  paradise."  This  teaches  that  while 
Christ's  body  was  in  the  grave,  and  his  soul  in 
hades,  he  was  in  a  state  of  rest  and  felicity. 

Take  up  the  case  of  the  rich  man.  He  died, 
was  buried,  and  in  hades  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being 
in  torments.     Here  the  word  does  not  mean  the 

20 


306  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

grave,  for  the  grave  is  included  in  the  language 
"  was  buried."  It  must  mean  a  state  and  condi- 
tion beyond  the  grave.  A  man  dead  and  buried 
could  hardly  be  supposed  as  lifting  up  his  eyes 
and  seeing  and  talking  in  the  grave.  I^ow,  to 
understand  the  condition  of  the  rich  man's  soul, 
we  will  take  his  own  language,  "  And  in  (hades) 
hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments." 
This  will  lead  us  to  observe  that  the  word  hades 
not  only  signifies  the  unseen  or  invisible  world, 
but  it  is  also  used  to  signify  a  condition  of  extreme 
suffering.  Take  the  following  passage  as  an  il- 
lustration :  "  And  thou,  Capernaum,  which  art 
exalted  to  heaven,  shalt  be  brought  down  to 
(hades)  hell."  Here  the  meaning  of  the  word  is 
obvious,  and  denotes  a  state  of  suffering.  This 
was  the  exact  condition  of  the  rich  man.  He  w^aa 
in  a  state  of  suffering  while  in  hades.  This,  in  the 
very  nature  of  things,  could  not  be  true  if  the 
word  signifies  nothing  more  than  the  grave. 

Let  us  observe  more  closely  the  language  of  the 
narrative.  It  had  actually  occurred.  "  There  loas 
a  certain  rich  man ; "  not  is,  not  shall  be ;  but 
there  was  such  a  man.  He  died,  was  buried,  and 
in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes.  Was  that  true  in  re- 
lation to  the  Jews?  Had  they,  as  a  nation,  died? 
"Were  they  at  that  time,  or  before  that  time,  call- 
ing for  the  gospel?     Christ  speaks  of  a  time,  not 


CARDFULLt  EXAMINED.  30? 

past,  but  in  the  future,  when  their  house  should 
be  left  unto  them  desolate.  But  that  time  had 
not  yet  come.  But  the  rich  man  had  died  and 
was  buried. 

l^ow  take  the  case  of  the  beggar.  Se  also  had 
died,  and  w*as  in  Abraham's  bosom.  Can  this  be 
said  respecting  the  gentiles  at  that  time?  Had 
they  come  into  the  spiritual  privileges  which  had 
been  lost  by  the  Jews  ?  It  was  not  until  long  aft- 
er this  that  the  gentiles  came  in.  But  Jesus  said 
these  two  men  had  lived.  The  rich  man  had  died, 
and  was  buried ;  and  Lazarus  also  had  died,  and  was 
in  Abraham's  bosom. 

Observe  another  fact.  These  men.  Dives  and 
Lazarus,  were  then  separated  by  an  impassable 
gulf.  This  is  not  true  respecting  the  Jews  and 
gentiles,  nor  never  was  true.  There  never  has 
been  an  impassable  gulf  between  them. 

From  these  considerations  it  is  perfectly  clear 
that  while  hades  signifies  the  unseen  or  invisible 
world  of  departed  spirits,  and  sometimes  only  the 
grave,  it  also  means  a  state  of  extreme  suffering, 
and  is  used  in  this  latter  sense  in  the  case  of  the 
rich  man.  ITow,  when  we  remember  that  this  suf- 
fering occurred  after  the  rich  man  had  died  and 
was  buried,  we  can  not  evade  the  conclusion  that 
the  Savior  intended  to  teach  this  solemn  truth, 
namely,  that  heaven  and  hell  lie  beyond  the  grave, 


BOS  UNIVERSAL  EESTORATION 

and  that  men  during  their  life-time  form  a  charac- 
ter which  will  fit  them  for  one  or  the  other ;  and 
with  this  accord  many  plain  and  unambiguous 
passages  of  scripture.  ^'Whatsoever  a  man  sow- 
eth  that  shall  he  also  reap." 

Mr.  Thayer,  author  of  "  The  Tlieology  of  Uni- 
versalism,"  page  383,  says,  "  Of  course,  then,  hades 
('hell')  is  not  a  place  of  endless  torment,  other- 
wise it  could  not  be  destroyed.  Whatever,  there- 
fore, the  interpretation  given  to  the  narration  of 
Dives  and  Lazarus,  whether  regarded  as  a  parable 
or  literal  history,  it  is  plain  that  the  rich  man  was 
not  in  a  place  of  endless  torments."  Here  Mr. 
Thayer  virtually  admits  that  the  rich  man  was  in 
a  state  of  suUering,  but  says  it  was  not  endless. 
By  what  authority  does  he  contradict  the  words  of 
Christ?  Christ,  in  giving  the  narration,  says  there 
was  "a  gulf  fixed,''^  which  could  not  be  passed. 
When  will  Dives  cross  that  gulf  which  can  not  be 
crossed  ? 

What  interpretation  would  the  Jews  most  likely 
give  to  the  language  of  Christ  employed  in  this 
narrative?  It  is  very  generally  admitted  that  the 
Jews  believed  in  punishment  after  death.  JSTo 
matter  from  what  source  they  obtained  this  idea, 
they  believed  it;  and  Christ,  as  a  teacher  sent  from 
God,  never  once  reproved  them  for  holding  this 
sentiment,  but,  on  the  contrary,  employed  words 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  309 

and  illustrations  which  must  have  confirmed  them 
in  that  belief.  It  does  not  take  Universalist  preach- 
ers three  years  to  tell  the  people  whether  they  be- 
lieve in  future  punishment  or  not.  Just  think  of 
Christ  being  a  Universalist  preacher,  talking  to 
men  who  believed  in  punishment  after  death,  and 
saying.  There  was  a  certain  rich  man,  clothed  in 
purple  and  fine  linen.  This  rich  man  died  and 
was  buried,  and  in  (hades)  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes, 
being  in  torments.  He  did  not  say  merely  that 
the  rich  man  had  died  and  gone  to  hades,  but  in 
hades  lifted  up  his  eyes  and  was  in  torments.  This 
was  just  what  the  Jews  believed  respecting  the 
wicked  after  death.  Would  not  such  a  discourse  as 
this  be  calculated  to  confirm  the  Jews  in  that  which 
they  already  believed?  One  of  two  things  must  be 
true, — either  Christ  believed  in  future  punishment 
himself,  or  else  he  wished  the  Jews  to  continue  to 
believe  what  was  not  true. 

Mr.  Thayer  says  whatever  interpretation  may 
be  given  to  the  narrative  of  Dives  and  Lazarus,  it 
is  plain  that  the  rich  man  was  not  in  a  place  of 
endless  torment.  But  what  has  that  to  do  with 
the  question,  since  Mr.  Thayer  and  Mr.  Guild 
both  contend  that  this  is  a  life  of  retribution,  and 
not  of  probation;  that  no  man  is  either  rewarded 
or  punished  in  the  next  world  for  what  he  may  do 
in  this  world?     If  they  in  any  sense  admit  that 


310  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

men  are  punished  after  death,  they  destroy  their 
whole  system.  Mr.  Thayer,  page  304,  says,  "  The 
penalty  due  to  sin  is  inflicted  here."  Mr.  Guild 
says,  "  Men  can  not  sow  in  one  field  and  reap  in 
another."  There  is  no  common  sense  in  their 
talking  about  future  endless  punishment.  But 
when  they  feel  pressed  by  the  word  of  God,  they 
would  fain  dodge  to  one  side  and  say,  "Ah,  but  it 
is  not  endless  punishmeni;^^  forgetting  that  when 
they  directly  or  impliedly  admit  punishment  in 
any  sense  after  death  it  destroys  the  whole  theory 
of  Universalism. 

On  the  assumption  that  the  narrative  of  the  rich 
man  and  Lazarus  was  only  a  parable,  it  might  be 
well  to  consider  the  following  points:  Did  our 
Lord  ever  predicate  a  parable  upon  anything  that 
was  not  fact?  Did  he  at  any  time  use  a  parable 
wherein  the  thing  represented  was  not  equal  to 
the  representation?  He  said  there  w^as  a  certain 
rich  man.  He  did  not  say  that  the  Jewish  nation 
was  like  unto  a  certain  rich  man.  The  language 
is  emphatic,  and  the  narration  is  predicated  on 
what  our  Lord  gives  as  a  fact.  "A  parable  may 
be  intended  simply  to  state  a  fact  from  which  to 
draw  some  moral  lesson;  or,  one  fact  may  be 
stated  and  compared  with  some  other  fact."  In 
either  case  they  must  be  predicated  on  fact. 

In  the  case  under  review,  the  fact  stated  is  that 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  311 

there  was  a  certain  rich  man  who  had  lived,  died, 
and  was  buried,  and  in  [hades)  hell  he  lifted  up  his 
eyes,  being  in  tornrient.     No  matter  what  applica- 
tion of  the  narration  may  be  made,  it  was  based 
on  a  fact.     If  we  assume  that  no  such  fact  had 
occurred,  we  bring  against  Christ  the  grave  charge 
of  an  intentional  misrepresentation.     Let  us  take 
up  another  one  of  Christ's  narrations,  which  may 
serve  to  illustrate  this  one.     Our  Lord  says  that  a 
certain  man  went  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho, 
and  fell  among  thieves.    They  stripped  and  wound- 
ed him.    A  priest  and  Levite  passed  by ;  and  finally 
a  good  Samaritan  had  compassion  on  him.     "Was 
this  all  fiction  ?     "Were  there  no  such  places  as  Je- 
rusalem and  Jericho?     "Were  there  no  thieves  in 
those    days?     Was  the  stripping   and   wounding 
impossible  ?     Were  there  no  priests  and  Levites  ? 
This    narration    commences  precisely  as  that  of 
Dives  and  Lazarus.     If   there  was  not  a  certain 
rich   man,   who   died   and   was  buried,   and  tor- 
mented in  hades,  then  there  was  not  a  certain  man 
who  went  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho ;  there 
were  no  such  places  in  existence;  it  is  pure  fiction, 
and   yet  fiction  that  must  have   led   those  that 
heard  it  into  error,  or  rather  confirmed  them  in 
an  error  which  they  already  believed. 

The  most  reasonable  conclusion  is  that  the  case 
of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  as  narrated  by  the 


312  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

Savior,  was  a  real  case.  It  had  actually  occurred. 
If  it  be  a  parable,  it  simply  shows  what  may  be  ; 
for  Christ  would  not  suppose  an  impossible  case. 
If  it  is  a  real  history,  it  teaches  us  what  has  been. 
In  either  case  we  have  this  moral  lesson  taught: 

1.  That  men  have  a  conscious  existence  after 
death;  that  the  soul  does  not  die  with  the  body. 
Nor  can  the  doctrine  of  the  transmigration  of 
souls  be  true. 

2.  Heaven  and  hell  lie  beyond  this  world ;  and 
men  during  their  life-time  form  characters  which 
will  lit  them  for  one  or  the  other  of  these  worlds. 

3.  That  the  happiness  of  the  one  will  be  end- 
less and  the  misery  of  the  other  will  be  endless. 
The  gulf  is  fixed  and  impassable.  It  could  not  be 
crossed  either  way. 

4.  This  life  is  a  state  of  probation  and  not  of 
retribution.  This  is  emphatically  taught  in  the 
language  of  Abraham  to  Dives,  "Son,  remem- 
ber that  thou  in  thy  life-time  receivedst  thy 
good  things,  and  likewise  Lazarus  evil  things : 
but  now  he  is  comforted,  and  thou  art  tor- 
mented." How  exactly  this  accords  with  the 
sentiment  taught  in  the  seventy- third  psalm. 
The  wicked,  says  the  psalmist,  are  not  in  trouble 
as  other  men ;  they  have  more  than  heart  could 
wish ;  their  eyes  stand  out  with  fatness ;  while 
waters  of  a  full  cup  are  wrung  out  to  the  right- 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  313 

eous ;  but  when  "  I  went  into  the  sanctuary  of 
God,  then  understood  I  their  end."  They  were 
set  in  slippery  places,  and  would  be  brought  down 
to  destruction.  There  is  an  afterward,  a  time 
coming  when  men,  all  men,  shall  reap  what  they 
have  sowed. 

5.  God  has  done  enough  for  mankind.  If 
they  will  not  turn  away  from  sin  and  com.e  to 
Christ  with  what  they  have,  they  would  not 
change  their  course  if  more  were  done.  Dives 
and  his  brethren  had  Moses  and  the  prophets.  If 
they  would  not  repent  and  believe  with  these 
truths,  and  under  such  teachers,  they  would  not  be 
persuaded  though  one  should  rise  from  the  dead. 
So  now.  We  have  Moses  and  the  prophets,  and 
Christ  and  the  apostles.  If  wdth  these  before  us 
we  will  not  turn  to  Christ  and  live,  we  would  not 
be  persuaded  if  a  score  were  to  come  from  the 
shadowy  regions  of  the  dead.  In  the  days  of 
Christ  Lazarus  came  from  the  dead,but  the  peo- 
ple instead  of  being  convinced  of  the  truth  of  re- 
ligion only  sought  to  kill  him  and  get  him  out  of 
the  way. 

6.  Whether  we  regard  this  narration  as  a  par- 
able or  a  real  history,  it  is  predicated  on  a  fact,  or 
a  possible  fact.  It  actually  had  occurred,  or  could 
occur;  otherwise  it  is  pure  fiction.  If  we  say  it 
actually  had  occurred,  or  might  occur,  it  settles  the 


314  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

question  of  future  endless  punishment.  If  we  say 
it  had  not  and  could  not  occur,  then  it  is  neither 
a  parable  nor  a  real  history,  but  fiction.  But  Christ 
never  used  a  parable  that  was  not  based  upon  a 
fact,  or  a  possible  fact.  Whether,  therefore,  we  re- 
gard it  as  a  parable  or  a  real  history,  the  lessons 
taught  are  all  the  same.  If  it  were  a  fact  that  the 
rich  man  was  suffering  in  hades,  or  if  it  were  pos- 
sible for  such  a  thing  to  occur,  then  it  settles  the 
doctrine  of  future  endless  punishment;  for  the 
gulf  was  actually  impassable. 

Dr.  Clarke,  in  commenting  on  this  portion  of 
God's  word,  makes  the  following  observation: 
"  This  account  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus  is  ei- 
ther a  parable  or  a  real  history.  If  it  be  a.  parable, 
it  is  what  may  be;  if  it  be  a  real  history,  it  is  that 
which  has  been.  Either  a  man  may  live  as  is  here 
described,  and  go  to  perdition  when  he  dies,  or 
some  have  lived  in  this  way,  and  are  now  suffering 
the  torments  of  an  eternal  fire.  The  account  is 
equally  instructive  in  whichsoever  of  these  lights 
it  is  viewed." 

JUDAS. 

There  is  no  question  in  regard  to  the  case  of 
Judas.  He  was  a  real  character,  and  was  one  of 
the  twelve  disciples.  In  John  xvii.  12,  Jesus  says: 
"While  I  was  with  them  in  the  world,  I  kept  tlieni 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  315 

ill  thy  name :  those  that  thou  gavest  me  I  have 
kept,  and  none  of  them  is  lost,  but  the  son  of  per- 
dition."    Two  points  are  set  forth  in  this  passage. 

1.  Our  Lord  says  emphatically  that  Judas  was  lost. 

2.  He  is  called  the  '^son  of  perdition."  "Perdi- 
tion or  destruction  is  personified;  and  Judas  is  rep- 
resented as  being  her  son  ;  that  is,  one  of  the  worst 
of  men,  one  whose  crime  appears  to  have  been  an 
attempt  to  destroy  not  only  the  Savior  of  the  world, 
but  also  the  whole  human  race."  This  text  alone 
is  enough  to  place  the  case  of  Judas  beyond  all 
reasonable  hope.  If  Jesus  had  said  of  John 
that  he  was  saved,  no  man  would  have  had 
the  shadow  of  a  doubt;  nor  Avould  they  have  in 
the  case  of  Judas  if  it  were  not  that  restorationists 
seek  to  prove  the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation 
of  all  men.  The50?i  of  perdition  betrayed  the  Son 
of  man  for  money,  and  afterward  hung  himself. 
Yet  Univei*salists  say  he  was  saved  as  certainly  as 
Jobn  was  saved.  A  worse  character  than  Judas 
can  hardly  be  imagined.  He  was  a  tJiief,  a  miser , 
a  traitor,  had  a  devil,  and  ended  his  earthly  career 
by  hanging  himself. 

In  Matthew  xxvi.  24,  Jesus  said :  *'  The  Son  of 
man  goeth  as  it  is  written  of  him:  but  woe  unto 
that  man  by  whom  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed  !  it 
had  been  good  for  that  man  if  he  had  not  been 
born."     In  Mark  xiv.  21  the  language  is,  if  possi- 


316  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

ble  a  little  stronger.  ''  Good  were  it  for  that  man 
if  he  had  never  been  born."  Could  this  be  said  of 
any  man  if  the  doctrine  of  Universalism  were  true? 
Would  it  have  been  better  for  Judas  ?  He  com- 
mitted a  great  crime,  but  the  punishment  was  of 
short  duration.  He  went  out  and  hanged  himself, 
and  went  to  heaven.  Universalists  say  that  men 
are  fully  punished  in  this  world  for  all  the  sins 
they  commit.  Then  Judas  must  have  been  in 
heaven  in  a  few  hours  after  he  betrayed  the  Son  ot 
man.  He  was  there  before  Jesus  was.  And  yet 
our  Savior  says  it  were  good  for  that  man  if  he 
had  never  been  born.  How  can  that  be,  when  aft- 
er a  few  days'  suffering  a  man  enters  upon  an  end- 
less life  of  bliss  ?  If  a  man  should  have  to  suffer 
for  millions  of  years,  and  then  enter  upon  an  end- 
less life  of  joy  and  peace,  it  could  not  be  said  that 
it  were  better  if  he  had  never  been  born.  He 
would  still  have  an  eternity  of  bliss  before  him. 

It  may  be  said,  however,  .that  Judas  repented. 
Very  true ;  but  what  were  the  fruits  of  his  repent- 
ance? Was  it  the  fruit  of  evangelical  repentance? 
His  repentance  was  like  the  sorrow  of  this  world, 
which  worketh  death;  but  godly  sorrow  Avorketh 
repentance  not  to  be  repented  of.  If  the  repent- 
ance of  Judas  was  genuine,  then  every  man  that 
repents  should  go  out  quickly  and  hang  himself. 
Calmet  says :  "  Judas  only  became  the  son  of  por- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  317 

dition  because  of  his  willful  malice,  his  abuse  of 
the  grace  and  instructions  of  Christ,  and  was  con- 
demned through  his  own  avarice,  perfidy ,  insensi- 
bility,  and  despair.'' 

Considering  the  character  of  Judas, — what  he 
was,  what  he  did,  and  what  our  Savior  said  about 
him, — there  seems  to  be  no  way  of  avoiding  the 
conclusion  that  he  was  hopelessly  lost.  If  half  as 
much  had  been  said  respecting  a  good  man,  no  one 
would  have  doubted  his  future  endless  happiness. 


318  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

HADES,  SHEOL,  GEHENNA. 

The  doctrine  of  a  future  state  of  existence  after 
tliis  life,  and  a  place  of  torment  in  which  the 
wicked  will  be  punished  after  death,  is  no  new 
theory.  "Ancient  and  modern  heathens,  the  Jews 
and  Mohammedans, .  we  find,  believed  in  a  future 
state  of  retribution;  it  is  not,  therefore,  a  senti- 
ment peculiar  to  Christianity."  It  would  be  dif- 
ficult to  form  any  conception  of  a  religion  which 
rejected  the  idea  of  future  retributions.  To  re- 
quire men  to  discharge  certain  duties  while  living, 
and  at  the  same  time  inform  them  that  it  w^ill 
make  no  possible  difference  after  death,  whether 
they  obey  or  disobey,  is  contrary  to  the  princi- 
ples of  all  religions.  It  is  contrary  to  reason 
and  our  highest  notions  of  justice.  But  this  is 
precisely  what  Universal '.sts  teach.  They  claim 
that  it  will  make  no  difference  in  the  end  what  a 
man  does  in  this  life.  He  may,  if  he  choose,  be  a 
Christian;  or  he  may  be  an  infidel.  lie  may 
obey  the  requirements  of  the  gospel,  or  he  may  set 
them  aside.     He  may  love  God  or,  he  may  hate 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  319 

him.  It  will  all  be  the  same  in  the  end.  This  is 
TJniversalism,  and  they  dare  not  deny  it. 

To  complete  their  theory,  they  must  deny  that 
there  is  a  hell  or  place  where  the  wicked  will  be 
punished  after  death.  In  the  preceding  chapter 
we  made  some  remarks  respecting  the  place  of 
future  punishment.  In  this  connection  it  will  be 
necessary  to  consider  it  more  particularly.  We 
will  commence  with  hades.  This  word  occurs 
eleven  times  in  the  New  Testament.  Ten  times  it 
•is  translated  hell,  and  once  it  is  rendered  grave. 
Hades  signifies  the  world  of  departed  spirits  in 
general.  Any  special  meaning  given  to  it  must  be 
determined  by  the  connection  in  which  it  occurs. 
It  is  claimed  that  hades  of  the  ^N'ew  Testament  is 
the  equivalent  of  sheol  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
signifies  the  grave,  or  place  of  the  dead.  Allow- 
ing this  to  be  true,  are  we  thence  to  infer  that 
these  words  were  never  employed  in  any  other 
sense?  Does  the  word  heaven  always  mean  the 
final  home  of  the  saints  ?  Certainly  not.  Are  we 
thence  to  conclude  that  it  was  never  used  in  that 
sense?  JN'ow,  because  the  words  hades  and  sheol 
were  sometimes  used  to  signify  the  grave,  or  the 
place  of  the  departed  in  a  general  sense,  does  it 
necessarily  follow  that  they  were  never  used  in 
any  other  sense? 

It  is  assumed  in  this  argument  that  while  the 


320  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

word  hades  is  employed  in  the  I^ew  Testament  to 
signify  the  grave,  or  place  of  departed  souls  in 
general,  it  is  also  used  in  such  connection  as  would 
not  justify  any  such  interpretation.  Take  the  case 
of  the  rich  man,  Luke  xvi.  23:  "And  in  [Jiades] 
hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments."  If 
it  be  assumed  that  this  is  only  a  parable,  it  will  not 
detract  anything  from  the  force  of  the  argument. 
If  it  is  a  parable,  it  is  based  upon  a  fact  or  a  pos- 
sible fact.  It  either  had  occurred  or  might  occur; 
if  not,  then  it  is  pure  fiction.  But  the  language 
employed  is  too  emphatic  for  fiction.  Our  Lord 
said  there  loas  a  certain  man ;  he  had  lived,  died, 
and  was  buried;  "and  in  \liades]  hell  he  lifted  up 
his  eyes,  being  in  torments."  Observe  that  this 
lifting  up  of  the  eyes  and  being  in  torments  was 
after  he  was  dead  and  buried.  Whatever  view, 
therefore,  may  be  taken  of  this  case,  it  is  certain 
that  hades  in  this  connection  means  more  than  the 
grave.  It  not  only  represents  a  state  of  being  be- 
yond the  grave,  but  a  condition  of  suffering. 

ITow  take  the  word  sheol  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  it  is  claimed  means  the  same  as  hades.  "  The 
wicked  shall  be  turned  into  [sheol^  hell,  and  all  the 
nations  that  forget  God."  (Psalms  ix.  17.)  Does 
sheol  in  this  passage  mean  nothing  more  than  the 
grave,  or  place  of  departed  in  a  general  sense? 
Then  what  more  is  threatened  to  the  wicked  than 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  321 

will  befall  the  righteous  ?  Both  will  die  and  go 
into  the  grave,  and  into  the  unseen  or  invisible 
world.  If  sheol  signifies  nothing  more  than  the 
grave,  or  unseen  world  of  spirits,  then  there  is  ab- 
solutely nothing  in  the  threat.  It  is  without  force. 
Wherefore  say  that  the  wicked  and  all  the  nations 
that  forget  God  shall  be  turned  in  (sheol)  hell, 
when  all  must  go  there,  whether  they  are  righteous 
or  wicked  ? 

It  is  absolutely  certain  that  while  sheol  of  the 
Old  Testament  and  hades  of  the  l^ew  Testament 
were  frequently  used  to  signify  the  grave,  or  invis- 
ible region  of  departed  souls  in  general,  they  were 
also  used  to  represent  a  state  and  condition  after 
death,  and  beyond  the  grave,  ^'  The  wicked  shall 
be  turned  into  [sheol]  hell,  and  all  the  nations  that 
forget  God."  The  rich  man  died  and  was  buried, 
"  and  in  [hades']  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in 
torments." 

We  will  next  in  order  examine  the  meaning  and 
import  of  the  word  Gehenna.  This  word  is  com- 
pounded of  two  Hebrew  words,  Ge  Hinnom ; 
that  is,  "the  valley  of  Hinnom."  In  the  I^ew 
Testament  it  is  called  Gehenna,  and  occurs  twelve 
times.  In  determining  the  meaning  of  a  word  or 
term  we  must  not  only  take  the  definition  of  the 
word  itself,  but  such  definition  as  will  agree  ^vith 
the  context.     Because  the  word  Gehenna  literally 


322  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

signified  the  ^'  valley  of  Hinnom','it  does  not  follow 
that  it  was  never  employed  in  any  other  sense. 
This  must  be  determined  by  the  context.  Para- 
dise, according  to  the  original  meaning  of  the 
term,  signifies  "  a  place  inclosed  for  pleasure  and 
delight."  The  translators  of  the  Old  Testament 
used  this  word  in  reference  to  the  garden  of  Eden. 
In  the  iTew  Testament  it  is  used  as  another  word 
for  heaven.  ITow,  if  because  Gehenna  literally 
means  the  valley  of  Hinnom  it  never  means  any- 
thing else,  then  paradise  never  means  anything 
more  than  the  garden  of  Eden. 

Heaven  is  the  name  commonly  used  to  designate 
the  place  of  the  saints'  final  rest.  But  Paul  says 
he  was  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven.  Then 
there  must  be  a  first  and  second  heaven,  ^ow,  if 
because  Gehenna  literally  signified  the  ^'  valley  of 
Hinnom"  it  was  never  used  to  mean  anything 
else^  then  the  word  heaven  does  not  mean  the 
place  of  the  saints'  final  home  because  it  was  used 
to  mean  something  else.  Furthermore,  the  Script- 
ures represent  the  abode  of  the  pure  and  good  as 
a  place  ^'far  above  all  heavens," 

Jerusalem  was  a  great  city  in  the  land  of  Pales- 
tine. But  was  the  name  (Jerusalem)  never  used  to 
mean  anything  else?  H  because  Gehenna  lite  rail}'' 
meant  the  valley  of  Hinnom  it  never  meant  any- 
thing else,  then  Jerusalem  never  meant  anything 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  323 

else  than  the  city  of  Jerusalem  on  earth.  As 
already  stated,  the  meaning  of  words  is  not  only 
to  be  determined  by  their  simple  definition,  but 
that  definition  must  agree  with  the  context.  We 
are  now  prepared  to  examine  a  few  passages 
where  the  word  Gehenna  is  used. 

"And  fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but 
are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul :  but  rather  fear  him 
which  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in 
[Gehenna]  hell."  (Matthew^  x.  28.)  "And  I  say 
unto  you  my  friends,  Be  not  afraid  of  them  that 
kill  the  body,  and  after  that  liave  no  more  that 
they  can  do.  But  I  will  forewarn  you  whom  ye 
shall  fear :  Fear  him,  which  after  he  hath  killed 
hath  power  to  cast  into  [Gehenna]  hell;  yea,  I 
say  unto  you.  Fear  him."  (Luke  xii.  4,  5.)  Sev- 
eral things  are  very  clearly  taught  in  these  passa- 
ges. (1.)  The  body  and  the  soul  are  distinct 
principles.  The  body  may  be  killed  and  the  soul 
escape.  Men  may  kill  the  body,  because  it  is 
mortal ;  but  they  can  not  kill  the  soul,  because  it  is 
immortal.  (2.)  In  this  (Gehenna)  hell  there  are 
elements  of  suffering  for  the  soul  as  well  as  for  the 
body.  Both  soul  and  body  are  to  be  destroyed — 
cast  into  (Gehenna)  hell.  This  was  not  true  of 
the  "valley  of  Hinnom."  There  were  no  elements 
of  sufiering  for  the  soul  in  the  valley  of  Hinnom. 
(3.)     The  term  soul,  as  it  occurs  in  this  scripture, 


324  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

does  not  mean  the  natural  life,  for  in  killing  the 
body  that  life  would  be  destroyed.  But  it  is  af- 
firmed that  the  murderers  of  the  body  have  no 
more  that  they  can  do ;  hence  the  soul  must  be  a 
distinct  principle  from  the  body.  (4.)  They  were 
to  fear  God  because  he  was  able  to  destroy  both 
soul  and  body  in  (Gehenna)L  hell.  Those  who 
killed  the  body  might  cast  it  into  the  valley  of 
Hinnom,  but  God  alone  was  able  to  cast  both  into 
Gehenna.  (5.)  If  nothing  more  is  meant  than 
the  valley  of  Hinnom,  then  it  would  seem  that  it 
was  possible  to  cast  both  soul  and  body  into 
that  valley.  Again,  it  would  seem  that  it  was 
no  great  matter  to  be  killed,  but  a  very  seri- 
ous matter  to  have  the  dead  body  cast  into  the 
valley  of  Hinnom.  In  other  words,  it  was  noth- 
ing to  die,  but  a  most  dreadful  thing  to  be  buried. 

Mr.  Thayer,  page  394,  in  order  to  escape  the  full 
force  of  this  passage,  says:  "The  text  does  not 
say  that  God  will  destroy  soul  and  body,  but  that 
he  is  able  to  do  it,  or  hath  power  to  do  it."  Ob- 
serve the  language  of  the  text.  Christ  gives  this 
as  a  reason  why  they  should  fear  God.  Would  he 
threaten  the  people  with  what  he  knew  God  would 
not  do?  If  God  would  not  do  what  Christ  said, 
why  then  did  he  threaten  them  with  it?  Why 
use  this  as  a  reason  that  they  should  fear  God  ? 

It  is  not  possible  to  explain  these  passages  to 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  325 

mean  nothino-  more  than  the  valley  of  llinnom. 
Man  can  kill  tlie  body,  but  is  not  able  to  do  any- 
thing more.  God  can  kill  the  body  too;  but  they 
were  not  to  fear  him  on  this  account.  Why  then 
fear  him  at  all?  Is  there  anything  more  terrible 
than  the  death  of  the  body?  Yes.  '^ Fear  lam., 
IV hie h  after  he  hath  killed  hath  power  to  cast  into 
\_Gehevna']  hell;  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  Fear  hiniJ^ 
Now  if  God  certainly  would  not  do  anything  more 
than  man  could  do,  there  was  no  just  reason  why 
they  should  not  fear  man  as  much  as  God.  Then 
let  it  be  particularly  observed  that  this  casting  of 
soul  and  body  into  Gehenna  is  after  the  death  of 
the  body.  "After  he  hath  killed  hath  power  to 
cast  into  [Gehenna']  hell."  Paul,  in  Hebrews  x. 
29,  speaks  of  a  punishment  that  is  sorer  than  death 
— sorer  than  the  death  of  the  body.  Any  punish- 
ment that  is  sorer  than  death  must  be  after  death. 
Christ  is  here  speaking  of  being  cast  into  Gehen- 
na, which  is  far  more  to  be  feared  than  the  killing 
of  the  body;  and  it  is  after  the  killing  of  the 
body 

"And  if  thy  right  eye  offend  thee,  pluck  it  out, 
and  cast  it  from  thee :  for  it  is  profitable  for  thee 
that  one  of  thy  members  should  'perish,  and  not 
that  thy  whole  body  should  be  cast  into  [Gehenna] 
hell.  And  if  thy  right  hand  offend  thee,  cut  it  off, 
and  cast  it  from  thee :  for  it  is  profitable  for  thee 


82G  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

that  one  of  tliy  menibers  should  parish,  and  not 
that  tliy  whole  body  should  be  cast  into  \_G eh enna'] 
hell."  (Matt.  v.  29,  30.)  The  right  eye  and  the 
right  hand  are  evidently  used  to  point  out  such 
sins  as  are  most  profitable  and  pleasing  to  us.  But 
however  much  we  may  be  attached  to  them,  and 
however  profitable  they  may  be  to  us,  they  must 
be  cut  oft*.  Sin  may  be  as  dear  to  us  as  the  right 
eye  or  right  hand ;  still,  it  is  vastly  more  profitable 
to  part  with  these  in  time,  and  live  without  them, 
than  to  be  cast  into  [Gehenna)  hell  at  last. 

Turn  to  Mark  ix.  43-48,  where  this  discourse  is 
more  fully  reported.  Here  the  cutting  off  of  the 
hand  and  plucking  out  of  the  eye  are  urged,  be- 
cause it  is  more  profitable  to  part  with  these  than 
to  be  cast  into  (Gehenna)  hell.  But  this  is  not  all, 
for  Christ  immediately  adds,  "Into  the  fire  that 
never  shall  be  quenched."  Then  again  he  adds, 
*'  Cast  into  [Gehenna]  hell  fire  :  where  their  worm 
dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched."  This 
casting  into  (Gehenna)  hell  fire  is  all  to  take  place 
after  the  killing  of  the  body.  If  the  Savior  meant 
the  valley  of  Hinnom,  and  nothing  more  than  that, 
then  we  submit  the  following  questions  for  solu- 
tion: (1.)  Was  there  any  law  or  usage  which 
required  persons  to  be  cast  into  the  valley  of  Hin- 
nom, Avho  would  not  sufier  their  right  eye  to  be 
plucked  out  and  their  right  hand  to  be  cut  ofi'? 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  r]27 

(2.)  Was  there  any  law  or  usage  by  whicli  per- 
sons were  saved  from  being  cast  into  that  valley, 
provided  they  would  suffer  their  eye  to  be  plucked 
out  and  their  hand  cut  off?  (3.)  Is  it  true  that 
the  fire  in  the  valley  of  Hinnoni  never  went  out? 
Jesus  says,  "  It  never  shall  be  quenched."  Is  it 
burning  still?  Is  it  true  that  the  worm  in  the  val- 
ley of  Hinnom  never  died?  Jesus  said,  "Their 
worm  dieth  not."  I^ow,  I  affirm  that  this  is  not 
true  respecting  the  valley  of  Hinnom.  The  fire 
has  long  since  gone  out,  and  the  worms  have  long 
since  died.  Those  passages,  therefore,  that  threat- 
en men  with  being  cast  into  that  valley  have  no 
force  nor  meaning  now.  (4.)  By  what  authority 
did  Christ  threaten  them  with  being  cast  into  that 
valley?  and  was  there  any  danger,  provided  they 
did  reject  Christ? 

Christ  came  with  authority  to  teach  men  the 
way  of  salvation,  to  tell  them  words  whereby  they 
might  be  saved;  but  he  had  no  authority  to 
threaten  them'  with  being  cast  into  the  valle}^  of 
Hinnom.  He  had  a  right  to  tell  them  not  only 
what  God  could  do,  but  what  he  would  do  if  they 
rejected  him.  They  should  be  cast  into  Gehenna, 
— hell  fire, — into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be 
quenched.  These  passages  are  in  full  force  to-day. 
But  if  the  valley  of  Hinnom  was  meant,  and  noth- 
iuof  more  than  that,   all  these  texts  are  without 


328  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

force ;  for  the  fire  has  gone  out  and  the  worms 
have  died. 

In  Matthew  xviii.  8,  9,  very  nearly  the  same 
language  occurs.  Jesus  said  it  were  better  that 
the  hand  and  foot  should  be  cut  off,  than  having 
both  these  to  be  cast  into  (aioniaii)  everlasting 
fire.  In  the  ninth  verse  he  says  it  is  better  to  en- 
ter into  life  with  one  eye,  than  having  two  eyes  to 
be  cast  into  (Gehenna)  hell  fire,  or  into  the  burn- 
ing of  Gehenna.  The  words  used  by  Christ  are 
put  in  the  strongest  possible  form,  and  in  such 
connection  as  would  render  it  absolutely  impossi- 
ble to  refer  the  whole  matter  to  the  valley  of  Hin- 
nom. 

The  great  moral  lesson  taught  by  our  Savior  in 
these  passages  is  the  necessity  of  parting  with  all 
sin,  however  profitable  it  may  seem  to  be.  If  it 
is  as  dear  as  the  eye,  and  as  profitable  as  the  right 
hand,  we  must  part  with  it  if  we  would  enter  into 
life.  If  we  refuse  to  part  with  sin,  we  shall  be 
cast  into  (Gehenna)  hell  fire — into  the  fire  that 
never  shall  be  quenched.  Much  is  said  by  Uni- 
versalists  about  the  destruction  of  hades — hell ;  but 
it  is  nowhere  said  that  Gehenna,  the  proper  name 
for  hell,  will  ever  be  destroyed. 

Observe  the  words  employed  and  the  order  in 
which  they  stand.  "  Cast  into  [Gehenna]  hell  ' 
"  Go  into  [Gehenna]  hell,  into  the  fire  that  never 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  32 J 

shall  be  quenched."  "  Cast  into  [^Gehenyia]  hell 
lire,  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  lire  is 
not  quenched."  "Cast  into  [aionian]  everlasting 
lire."  All  this  is  threatened  to  those  who  reject 
Christ  and  cleave  to  their  sins.  And  this  punish- 
ment is  in  Gehenna,  and  is  to  be  inflicted  after  the 
death  of  the  body.  Yet  we  are  told  that  nothing 
more  is  meant  than  the  valley  of  Hinnoni.  But 
the  tire  in  that  valley  has  ceased  to  burn,  and  the 
worms  have  long  since  died.  Into  what  Gehenna 
are  the  wicked  now  to  be  cast  ?  Are  the  words  of 
Christ  still  in  force,  or  did  they  lose  their  force 
when  the  fire  in  the  valley  of  Hinnom  went  out? 

If  there  is  no  place  of  punishment  after  death, 
and  if  that  punishment  is  not  endless,  how  are  we 
to  account  for  the  language  employed  by  the  sa- 
cred writers? — and  more  especially  when  we  re- 
member that  the  people  in  those  days,  almost  with- 
out an  exception,  believed  in  the  future  endless 
punishment  of  the  wicked.  "  The  wicked  shall  be 
turned  into  [sheol']  hell,  and  all  the  nations  that 
forget  God."  "  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into 
[fdoiiian']  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil 
and  his  angels."  "These  shall  go  away  into  [aio- 
7(1^1]  everlasting  punishment."  "And  in  [^hades'] 
hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments." 
"  The  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  up  for- 
ever and  ever."     "  The  fire  shall  never  be  quench- 


330  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

ed."  "Their  worm  dieth  not."  "Cast  into  \_Ge- 
henna]  hell  fire."  "  They  shall  have  their  part  in 
the  lake  that  burneth  with  fire ;  this  is  the  second 
death." 

What  reason  can  be  assigned  for  the  employ- 
ment of  such  terms,  if  so  be  that  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  punishment  after  death,  and  if  that  pun 
ishment  is  not  endless  ?  Did  the  sacred  writers 
intend  to  deceive  the  people?  If  not,  why  use 
such  language  as  would  be  understood  at  the  time 
it  was  spoken,  and  afterward,  to  teach  the  doctrine 
of  future  endless  punishment  ? 

l^early  all  Bible  readers  for  eighteen  hundred 
years  understood  it  to  teach  the  doctrine  of  future 
endless  punishment.  The  first  man,  so  far  as  I 
can  learn,  who  assumed  that  this  doctrine  was  not 
taught  in  the  Bible  was  Hosea  Ballou.  A  few 
such  as  Origen  and  Murray  denied  future  endless 
punishment,  but  they  "  believed  that  the  Scriptures 
taught  that  the  wicked  would  sufier  in  hell  during  a 
long  but  indefinite  period."  Since  Ballou,  in  1818, 
made  the  discovery  that  the  doctrine  of  future 
punishment  was  not  taught  at  all,  Universalists 
have  denied  the  existence  of  evil  spirits  and  of  a 
place  of  future  punishment.  How  strange  that 
among  all  the  Christians  a7id  Bible  students 
for  eighteen  hundred  years  this  discovery  should 
not  have  been  made.     The  reason  is,  that  for  some 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  331 

cause  the  sacred  writers  used  such  terms  and  illus- 
trations as  would  most  naturally  lead  men  to  be- 
lieve in  future  endless  punishment.  The  result  is, 
that  if  Universalism  be  true  nineteen  twentieths 
of  all  the  Christians  that  have  ever  lived  have 
been  deceived — led  astray  by  what  seemed  to  be 
the  plain  teaching  of  the  word  of  God, 

Reader,  "Be  not  deceived;  God  is  not  mocked: 
for  whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also 
reap."  There  is  a  heaven  of  endless  peace  and 
joy  for  the  good — sl  rest  for  the  weary.  No  sick- 
ness shall  be  there,  nor  any  death.  And  there 
shall  be  no  night  in  heaven.  There  is  a  hell  of  end- 
less torments.  The  fearful,  and  unbelieving,  and 
m.urderers,  and  all  liars  shall  have  their  part  in  the 
lake  that  burneth  with  Jire.  This  is  the  second 
death. 


332  UNIVERS.4L  RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  XX: 

SIN  AN   INFINITE  EVIL. 

The  origin,  nature,  evil,  guilt,  and  consequences 
of  sin  is  a  subject  of  vast  moment  to  mankind. 
God  alone  must  be  the  judge  as  to  the  nature  and 
degree  of  punishment  to  inflict  upon  the  impeni- 
tent and  unforgiven.  Of  one  thing  we  can  not 
fail  to  be  convinced,  and  that  is  that  sin  must  be 
an  indescribable  evil  to  require  no  less  a  sacrifice 
to  atone  for  it  than  the  gift  of  the  only  begotten 
Son  of  God.  The  fact  that  God  sent  his  Son  into 
this  world  to  atone  for  sin  is  evidence  that  there 
was  no  merit  in  human  sufiering.  The  very  idea 
.nat  a  sinful,  guilty  mortal  could  by  sufiering  sat- 
isfy the  claims  of  a  perfect  law  is  preposterous. 
The  apostle  defines  sin  to  be  the  transgression  of 
law.  The  law  of  God  is  perfect,  and  demands  per- 
fect obedience.  ITow  to  suppose  that  a  man,  after 
having  violated  this  perfect  law,  could  turn  around 
and  satisfy  its  claims  for  past  ofienses  and  meet  its 
present  demands,  which  is  perfect  obedience,  is  to 
suppose  an  impossibility. 

To  reject  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement,  as 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  333 

Universalists  do,  is  to  set  aside  the  only  reasonable 
hope  of  eternal  salvation.  There  are  no  other 
grounds  on  which  any  man  can  be  saved.  If  man 
must  be  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the  divhie 
law,  then  he  becomes  his  own  Savior;  he  pays  the 
redemption  price  himself,  and  can  demand  a  release 
from  the  claims  of  the  law  upon  pure  principles  of 
justice.  The  law  demands  an  equivalent — no 
more  and  no  less.  If  man,  therefore,  can  render 
such  equivalent,  what  did  Christ  suiter  for  ?  The 
fact  that  Christ  came  into  the  world,  suffered, 
and  died,  is  evidence  conclusive  that  man 
could  not  meet  the  claims  of  the  law.  The 
sentence  of  death  was  passed  upon  the  whole  race, 
from  which  no  man  could  save  himself.  So  God, 
through  the  impulse  of  his  eternal  love,  gave  to  a 
lost  and  ruined  world  his  beloved  Son,  born  of  a 
woman  and  made  under  the  law,  that  he  might  re- 
deem those  that  were  under  the  law.  This  is 
taught  and  explained  by  the  apostle  in  I.  Cor.  xv. 
3 :  "  Christ  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  Script- 
ures." E"ow,  if  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus 
Christ  were  not  vicarious,  how  could  it  be  said  that 
he  died  for  our  sins?  Again  (Eph.  xvii.) :  "In 
whom  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood,  the 
forgiveness  of  sins,  according  to  the  riches  of  his 
grace."  "  Christ's  blood  was  the  redemption  price 
'paid  down  for  our  salvation''    Without  the  shed- 


334  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

ding  of  his  precious  blood  there  could  have  been 
no  remission  of  sins.  This  is  most  clearly  taught 
by  Paul  in  Col.  i.  14:  "In  whom  we  have  redemp- 
tion through  his  blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of  sins." 
The  Scriptures  nowhere  speak  of  redemption  in 
any  other  way  than  through  the  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
The  same  doctrine  is  taught  in  I,  John  ii.  2 :  ''  And 
he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins :  and  not  for  ours 
only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world." 
Christ  was  the  atoning  sacrifice  for  sin.  He  ren- 
dered satisfaction  to  the  law ;  so  that  God  can  now 
be  just  and  the  justifier  of  him  that  belie veth  in 
Jesus.  But  if  no  such  satisfaction  had  been  ren- 
dered to  the  law,  God  could  never  in  justice  to  his 
own  government  have  justified  any  one. 

Error  on  this  great  central  truth  of  revealed 
religion  tends  to  undermine  the  whole  structure 
of  Christianity.  Socinians,  Universalists,  Sweden- 
borgians,  and  Unitarians,  all  deny  the  doctrine  of 
vicarious  atonement,  and  as  a  consequence  their 
theology  is  vague  and  incoherent.  "  In  some  form 
and  to  some  degree  error  on  this  subject  is  radi- 
cal in  every  erroneous  system  of  religion." 

The  end  of  the  atonement  was  "that  God  might 
be  just  and  the  justifier  of  him  that  believeth  in 
Jesus.'  '  Is  not  that  atonement  then  in  its  nature 
infinite,  which  is  sufiicient  to  satisfy  God,  the  in- 
finite lawgiver  and  judge,  in  the  remission  of  sin 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  335 

to  every  one  who  cordially  confides  in  it,  and 
wbicli  80  effectually  repairs  the  injury  done  by  sin 
as  to  justify  him  in  the  sight  of  the  whole  universe 
for  so  doing?  Can  we  talk  of  limits  to  the  valiio 
of  such  a  sacrifice?  Can  we  assign  bounds  to  the 
efficacy  of  such  an  expiation  ?  Can  we  apply 
terms  of  measurement  to  the  nature  of  such  an 
atonement  for  sin?  Is  not  the  covering  ample 
enough  to  protect  a  universe  from  the  punishment 
of  sin,  were  they  all  in  need  of  its  protection,  and 
to  resort  to  it  for  shelter?"  And  yet  Universalists 
set  it  all  aside,  and  claim  that  man  must  satisfy 
the  claims  of  the  div^ine  law  by  his  own  suite rino^. 

From  these  considerations  w^e  conclude :  (1.) 
That  man,  being  under  the  condemnation  of  the 
divine  law,  could  not,  by  his  own  sufi:ering,  meet 
and  satisfy  its  claims.  (2.)  That  the  suftering 
and  death  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son 
of  God,  was  the  only  sacrifice  in  the  universe. that 
could  satisfy  the  claims  of  the  law.  (3.)  That  the 
atonement  in  its  nature  is  infinite ;  for  it  was  suf- 
ficient to  satisfy  an  infinite  God,  insomuch  that  he 
can  now  be  just  and  the  justijier  of  him  that  believ- 
eth  in  Jesus.  (4.)  That  sin  must  be  an  infinite 
evil  to  require  so  great  a  sacrifice  to  atone  for  it. 

Respecting  the  nature  of  the  penalty  connected 
with  the  divine  law,  it  can  not  be  less  than  an  end- 
less curse.     ''  The  wages  of  sin  is  death."    (Rom. 


336  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

vi.  23.)  "  Sin  when  it  is  finished  bringeth  forth 
death."  (James  i.  15.)  Now  whether  we  consider 
the  death  referred  to  in  these  passages  natural  or 
moral,  it  will  not  affect  the  argument.  In  either 
case  a  self-resurrection  is  out  of  the  question. 
*'  Death  left  to  the  tendency  of  its  own  nature  must 
hold  on  to  its  subjects  with  an  eternal  grasp,  unless 
it  be  afiirmed  that  death  can  produce  life."  A  soul 
dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins  can  no  more  pro- 
duce life  in  itself  than  a  man  naturally  dead  can 
produce  life  in  himself.  Whether  therefore  we 
consider  death  as  a  moral  or  physical  evil,  without 
a  supernatural  interference  it  will  hold  on  forever. 
The  penalty  of  the  divine  law,  if  left  to  the  ten- 
dency of  its  own  nature,  can  not  be  less  than  an 
endless  curse;  hence  the  evil  that  incurs  that  pen- 
alty must  be  infinite  in  its  nature. 

It  may  assist  us  in  forming  more  correct  ideas 
of  the  nature  and  magnitude  of  sin,  if  we  state  it 
in  the  following  order:  Sin  is  infinite.  (1.)  Be- 
cause it  is  an  evil  committed  against  a  being  of  in- 
finite purity,  power,  justice,  and  goodness.  (2.) 
Because  it  is  in  violation  of  obligations  which  are 
as  infinite  as  the  Lawgiver  himself.  (3.)  Because 
no  being  less  than  the  only  begotten  Son  of  an  in- 
finite God  could  atone  for  it.  (4.)  Because  none 
but  an  infinite  God  can  pardon  sin.  If  sin  were 
only  a  finite  evil  there  is  no  good  reason  why  a 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  337 

fiuite  being  might  not  have  atoned  for  it;  nor  is 
there  any  reason  why  a  finite  being  might  not  par- 
don it. 

As  long  as  man  exists,  whether  in  this  world  or 
in  the  world  to  come,  he  will  be  under  obligations 
to  obey  the  divine  law.  The  law  is  perfect,  and  de- 
mands perfect  obedience,  and  until  he  can  render 
such  obedience  he  will  be  held  under  condemna- 
tion. If  a  sinner  dies  while  under  the  sentence  of 
the  law,  its  claims  upon  him  will  be  as  endless  as 
his  existence.  If  sin  in  its  consequences  is  finite, 
then  it  must  terminate  at  death.  But  Universal- 
ists  do  not  claim  this.  Mr.  Thayer,  page  205, 
says  "that  thousands  die  in  ignorance,  unbelief, 
and  sin."  He  says  that  no  man  is  perfect  here — 
all  will  need  a  spiritual  change  in  the  resurrection. 
So,  according  to  their  own  theory,  the  effect  of 
sin  enters  the  future  world.  Is  that  finite  in  its 
nature  and  consequences  which  holds  on  to  man 
in  life,  in  death,  and  after  death?  It  may  be 
proper  to  state  in  this  connection  that  we  must 
discriminate  between  the  act  and  the  consequences 
of  that  act.  If  we  say  that  because  the  act  is 
finite  the  consequences  of  that  act  must  be  finite 
also,  we  will  err;  for  that  would  be  "  confounding 
the  physicial  quantity  wdth  the  moral  quantity, 
which  amounts  to  an  absurdity." 

The  question,  then,  is  not  whether  the  act  is 

22 


338  UNIVEBSAL  RESTOKATION 

finite,  but  whether  the  consequences  of  that  act 
are  necessarily  finite.  This  may  be  answered  by 
another  question :  Are  the  claims  of  the  law  finite 
or  infinite  ?  If  the  claims  of  the  law  are  only  finite, 
then  they  must  end  at  death.  "What  does  the  law 
require  ?  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  w  ith 
all  thy  heart,  mind,  soul,  and  strength."  Will  this 
claim  end  at  death  ?  'No ;  as  long  as  the  soul  ex- 
ists it  will  be  under  obligations  to  love  God  per- 
fectly. If,  then,  the  claim's  of  the  law  are  eternal, 
the  penalty  must  be  as  endless  as  its  claims.  If  a 
soul  enters  the  future  world  loving  God  with  all 
its  powers,  it  will  continue  to  love  him  forever.  If 
a  soul  enters  the  future  world  in  sin,  it  will  remain 
in  sin  forever. 

Universalists  deny  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
atonement,  and  thereby  sweep  away  from  man  the 
last  and  only  hope  of  eternal  life.  As  already 
stated,  "'the  penalty  of  the  divine  law,  which  is 
death,  is  in  itself  an  endless  curse,  and  if  left  to 
its  own  tendency  will  hold  on  to  its  subject  with 
an  eternal  grasp."  But  is  there  no  remedy  for  sin  ? 
I^Tot  in  Universalism.  It  knows  no  salvation,  no 
redemption,  no  forgiveness.  It  knows  nothing  of 
justification  by  faith,  nor  of  the  precious  blood  of 
Jesus,  which  cleanseth  from  all  sin. 

But  we  turn  from  this  cold  and  cheerless  theory 
to  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.     "  To  him  give  all 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  339 

the  prophets  witness,  that  through  his  name  who- 
soever believeth  in  him  shall  receive  remission  of 
sins."  "If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and 
just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from 
all  unrighteousness."  "  God  so  loved  the  world, 
that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoev- 
er believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  ev- 
erlasting life."  "  He  w^as  delivered  for  our  offenses, 
but  raised  again  for  our  justification."  "Therefore, 
being  justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  with  God 
through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

In  this  chapter  the  following  points  have  been 
considered.  (1.)  Sin  is  the  tz'ansgression  of  law. 
(2.)  A  sinful  man  can  not  by  suftering  render  sat- 
isfaction to  a  perfect  law.  (3.)  That  sin  must  be 
an  infinite  evil  (a)  because  it  is  committed  against 
a  Being  of  infinite  purity,  justice,  power,  and  good- 
ness ;  (6)  because  it  is  in  violation  of  an  infinite 
obligation;  (c)  because  no  being  less  than  the  only 
begotton  Son  of  an  infinite  God  could  atone  for  it ; 
(cl)  because  none  but  an  infinite  God  can  pardon 
sin.  (5.)  As  long  as  man  exists,  whether  in  this 
world  or  in  the  world  to  come,  he  will  be  under 
obligations  to  obey  the  law.  (6.)  Wo  can  not  de- 
termine the  nature  of  sin  by  the  act  alone,  but  by 
the  consequences  of  that  act.  (7.)  Inasmuch  as  the 
obligations  to  obey  the  law  are  eternal,  the  penalty 
thereto  must  be  eternal  also.     (8.)  The  penalty  of 


340  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

the  divine  law,  which  is  death,  is  iu  itself  an  end- 
less curse,  and  hence  the  sinner  never  can  endure 
all  the  penalty  of  the  law.  (9.)  Inasmuch  as  Uni- 
versalists  reject  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atone- 
ment, they  take  away  from  man  the  last  and  only 
hope  of  eternal  life. 


GAKBFULLY   EXAMINED.  341 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

BIBLE   DOCTRINE   CONCERNING   THE   DEVIL. 

To  complete  the  "Theology  of  Universalism," 
their  authors  must  deny  the  existence  and  evil  in- 
fluences of  devils.  Hence  they  must  find  a  way 
to  explain  all  those  passages  that  would  seem  to 
teach  this  doctrine.  It  will  be  proper  to  state 
clearly  and  distinctly  their  views.  Mr.  Thayer,  in 
his  "  Theology  of  Universalism,"  pages  421-422, 
says,  "  The  name  '  devil '  and  its  synonym  *  satan ' 
were  employed  as  metaphors  by  the  Savior  to  rep- 
resent the  hostility  to  the  gospel  of  the  Jewish  hie- 
rarchy (the  chief-priests,  scribes,  and  Pharisees). 
They  were  described  as  the  '  devil,'  or  *  evil  one,' 
who  sought  to  destroy  the  word  of  God  and  their 
agents  as  the  angels."  Again  he  says, "  The  apos- 
tle employs  the  word  also  as  a  figure  to  represent 
the  heathen  secular  power  in  opposition  to  Chris- 
tia.nity."  Mr.  Guild,  author  of  "  The  Universalist's 
Book  of  Reference,"  page  69,  says,  "All  that  is  said 
in  the  New  Testament  concerning  demons  is  spoken 
in  accordance  with  the  generally  received  opinions 
of  the  people  of  that  day,  and  without  any  intention 


342  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

to  sanction  those  opinions,  or  give  them  the  least 
countenance  or  support.  When  persons  are  spoken 
of  in  the  'Nqw  Testament  as  having  heen  possessed 
with  demons,  all  that  ought  to  be  understood  by  it 
is  that  the  persons  were  laboring  under  some  kind 
of  disease,  either  bodily  or  mental,  which  was  sup- 
posed to  be  occasioned  by  a  demon  or  demons." 
On  page  70  he  says,  "  When  it  is  said  of  Christ 
and  his  disciples  that  they  cast  demons  out  of  per- 
sons, we  are  to  understand  by  it  that  they  remov- 
ed the  diseases  under  which  the  .persons  were 
laboring,  and  which  were  supposed  to  be  produced 
by  demons."  These  authors  do  not  quite  agree. 
Mr.  Thayer  thinks  that  the  name  "  devil "  v/as 
employed  as  a  metaphor  and  represented  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees,  and  also  sometimes  the 
heathen  secular  power.  Mr.  Guild  thinks  the 
terms  were  employed  to  describe  some  kind  of  dis- 
ease, either  bodily  or  mental.  Among  those  who 
deny  the  existence  of  devils  there  are  no  uniform 
opinions.  "  In  one  text  a  devil  is  the  personified 
principle  of  evil;  in  another  text  the  devil  is  the 
evil  propensity  of  human  nature;  in  another  text 
the  devil  is  some  personal  enemy  or  adversary ;  in 
another  text  the  devil  is  a  disease,  madness,  or 
violent  insanity';"  and  still  in  another  text  he  is 
the  Roman  government.  Strange  indeed  that  the 
inspired  writers  should  have  ''used  language  so 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  343  . 

vaguely."     To  show  the  absurdity  of  these  notions 
we  will  examine  a  few  passages  of  scripture. 

Both  Christ  and  his  apostles  spoke  of  devils  and 
evil  spirits  as  having  a  separate  and  personal  ex- 
istence. E-especting  the  case  of  Mary  Magdalene, 
out  of  whom  Christ  cast  seven  devils,  Mr.  Guild 
says,  page  70,  "  We  are  to  understand  that  a  dis- 
ease was  removed  from  her  which  was  supposed  to 
be  occasioned  by  the  power  of  seven  demons." 
The  disease  in  her  case  must  have  been  very  com- 
plicated. Seven  diseases  all  preying  upon  one 
person  would  be  intolerable.  Or,  if  we  ado^Dt  Mr. 
Thayer's  method  of  interpretation,  which  is  that 
the  name  ^' devil"  was  used  to  represent  the  hos- 
tility of  the  chief-priests,  scribes,  and  Pharisees, 
then,  to  be  sure,  Mary  Magdalene  must  have  been 
a  host  in  herself — equal  to  seven  scribes  or  Phar- 
isees. Some  one  has  said  that  one  woman  was 
equal  to  seven  men.  Perhaps  whoever  said  it  had 
his  mind  on  Mary  Magdalene,  who  was  possessed 
of  seven  scribes  or  Pharisees.  • 

The  demoniac  Gadarene  spoken  of  in  Mark  v. 
2-16,  and  Luke  viii.  27-38,  was  a  very  remarkable 
case.  He  had  his  dwelling  among  the  tombs.  Mr. 
Guild  thinks  his  disease  was  some  sort  of  madness 
of  a  very  malignant  kind.  It  certainly  must  have 
been  very  malignant;  and,  like  that  of  Mary 
Magdalene,  it  luutt  have  been  very  complicated — a 


844  UNIVERSAL   RESTORATION 

whole  legion  of  diseases  had  hold  of  one  man. 
No  wonder  that  he  went  out  among  the  tombs, 
for  a  man  diseased  as  he  was  would  naturally  ex- 
pect to  go  there  very  soon.  But  what  seems  most 
remarkable  is  that  these  diseases  talked,  for  the 
conversation  was  carried  on  in  the  plural  form. 
"  They  besought  him."  "  The  devils  went  out  of 
the  man."  "  The  man  out  of  whom  the  devils  were 
departed."  "  Many  devils  were  entered  into  him." 
Here  the  plural  form  is  used.  Further  it  is  said, 
"  The  devils  went  out  of  the  man  and  entered  into 
the  swine."  "As  they  existed  before  they  entered 
into  the  man,  so  they  existed  after  they  came  out 
of  him."  Could  this,  with  any  degree  of  propri- 
ety, be  said  of  diseases  ?  Have  diseases  separate 
and  distinct  existences  ?  "All  the  devils  besought 
him,  saying.  Send  us  into  the  swine."  "And 
Jesus 'gave  them  leave."  That  is,  "All  the  diseases 
besought  him."  Then  all  the  diseases  went  out 
of  the  man  and  entered  into  the  swine.  Was  it 
the  man  that  besought  Jesus  that  he  might  enter 
into  the  swine?  If  so,  then  the  man  went  out  of 
himself.  But  this  could  not  be.  "  Certain  doc- 
tors," says  Dr.  Clarke,  ^^  in  the  sciences,  divinity , 
iind  physic,  gravely  tell  us  that  these  demoniacs 
were  only  common  madmen,  and  that  the  disease 
was  supposed  by  the  superstitious  Jews  to  be  oc- 
casioned by  demons.     But  with  due  deference  to 


CAREFULLY    EXAMINED.  eS45 

great  characters,  may  not  a  plain  man  be  permitted 
to  ask  by  what  figure  of  speech  can  it  be  said  that 
diseases  besought,  went  out,  filled  a  herd  of  swine, 
rushed  down  a  precipice,  &c.  What  silly  trifling 
is  this  ?  Some  people's  creeds  will  hardly  permit 
God  nor  the  devil  to  work,  and  in  several  respects 
hardly  to  exist;  for  he  who  denies  divine  inspira- 
tion will  scarcelv  acknowledge  diabolic  influence." 
*'It  seems  strange,"  says  Dr.  Lightfoot,  "to  find 
men  at  this  distance  of  time  questioning  the  truth 
of  that  which  neither  scribes  nor  Pharisees  then 
doubted ;  nor  did  they  ever  object  against  the 
pretensions  of  Christ  and  his  apostles  to  cast  them 
out.  And  if  the  whole  business  of  demonism  had 
been  only  a  vulgar  error  (as  wise  men  now  tell  us), 
what  a  fine  opportunity  had  the  wise  men  then  to 
unmask  the  whole  matter  and  thus  pour  contempt 
on  the  pretensions  of  our  blessed  Lord  and  his 
followers  who  held  it  to  be  one  proof  of  their  di- 
vine mission,  that  deinons  were  subject  to  them.'' 

If  the  demons  said  to  be  cast  out  by  Christ  were 
only  diseases,  the  evangelists  were  very  unfortunate 
in  the  use  of  language.  Matthew  says  (iv.  24) 
that  "  his  fame  went  throughout  all  Syria :  and 
they  brought  unto  him  all  sick  people  that  were 
taken  with  divers  diseases  and  torments,  and  those 
which  were  possessed  with  devils,  *  *  *  and  he 
healed  them."     Mark  says  (i.  34) :  "  And  he  healed 


34t)  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

many  tliat  were  sick  of  divers  diseases,  and  cast 
out  many  devils;  and  suffered  not  the  devils  to 
speak,  because  they  knew  him."  Let  it  be  observ- 
ed that  the  evangelists  do  not  o-ive  the  lano:uao^e  of 
Christ;  they  simply  record  what  Christ  did.  They 
distinguisli  between  diseases  and  devils.  Some 
were  sick,  and  some  were  possessed  of  devils. 
Christ  healed  the  diseases,  and  cast  out  the  devils. 
One  of  two  things  must  be  true.  Either  the  evan- 
gelists believed  in  real  devils,  or  else  they  intended 
to  deceive.  'No  honest  men  w^ould  so  record  what 
they  did  not  themselves  believe. 

But  it  is  affirmed  that  these  demons  talked — they 
oried  out.  Did  the  diseases  cr^'  out?  In  all  can- 
dor, let  me  ask,  What  cried  out  if  there  are  no 
devils?  Mark  the  hmguage.  It  was  not  a  devil, 
but  devils  that  talked  and  cried  out;  and  the  devils 
came  out  of  those  that  were  possessed. 

Suppose  w^e  take  Mr.  Thayer's  theory,  which  is 
that  the  w^ord  devil  was  employed  to  represent  the 
hostility  of  the  chief- priests,  scribes,  and  Pharisees, 
and  sometimes  the  Roman  government.  The  Gad- 
arene  demoniac  must  have  been  a  wonderful  Phari- 
see or  an  extraordinary  scribe.  But  all  the  scribes, 
Pharisees,  and  priests  that  were  in  him  came  out, 
and  went  into  the  swine.  Are  not  such  interpre- 
tations of  God's  blessed  word  trifling  with  sacred 
things?     Can  any  man  believe  that  the   inspired 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  847 

writers  would  give  such  descriptions  of  the  cure 
of  diseases,  or  of  the  hostility  of  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees  ? 

We  w^ill  take  another  text :  "Then  he  called 
his  twelve  disciples  together,  and  gave  them  power 
and  authority  over  all  devils,  and  to  cure  diseases." 
(Luke  ix.  1.)  Here  is  a  clear  distinction  between 
devils  and  diseases.  "What,"  says  Mr.  Lee,  "will  you 
substitute  for  all  devils  in  this  text?  Will  you  call 
it  all  kinds  of  evil  propensities  ?  That  power  they 
never  had,  or  they  would  have  converted  the  world. 
Will  you  call  it '  all  personified  principles  of  evil  V 
That  will  not  make  sense.  Will  you  call  it  all  dis- 
eases? Tliat  will  not  answer,  for  diseases  are 
named  in  the  latter  member  of  the  text.  If  you 
call  it  all  enemies,  adversaries,  opposers,  slanderers, 
false  accusers,  each  and  all  of  these  will  render  the 
text  false,  for  they  never  had  power  over  all  these. 
But  they  had  power  to  cast  out  devils  in  cases  of 
demoniac  possessions ;  and  this  is  what  is  meant, 
and  nothing  else  can^e  meant." 

Mr.  Guild,  page  70,  says:  "When  Christ  gave 
his  disciples  power  to  cast  out  demons,  we  are  to 
understand  that  he  gave  them  power  to  cure  or  re- 
move those  diseases  which  were  supposed  to  be  oc- 
casioned by  evil  spirits,  called  demons."  But  how 
are  we  to  understand  Christ's  language  when  he 
gave  his  disciples  power  and  authority  not  only  to 


348  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

cure  diseases,  but  also  to  cast  out  devils?  Does  the 
curing  of  a  disease  and  the  casting  out  of  a  devil 
mean  the  same  thing  ? 

We  will  give  a  few  passages  where  the  word 
devil  occurs,  and  leave  the  reader  to  substitute  dis- 
ease or  scribe  or  Pharisee  or  evil  propensity  in  its 
stead :  ''  The  enemy  that  sowed  them  is  the  devil." 
(Matt.  xiii.  39.)  "  The  devil  and  his  angels."  (Matt. 
XXV.  41.)  "  Eesist  the  devil,  and  he  will  flee  from 
you."  (James  iv.  7.)  "  Your  adversary  the  devil, 
as  a  roaring  lion,  walketh  about."  (I.  Peter  v.  8.) 
"He  that  committeth  sin  is  of  the  devil;  for  the 
devil  sinneth  from  the  beginning."  (I.  John  iii.  8.) 
•'When  the  devil  was  cast  out."  (Matt.  ix.  33.) 
"He  casteth  out  devils  through  the  prince  of  the 
devils.''  (Matt.  ix.  34.)  "  Devils  also  came  out  of 
many."  (Luke  iv.  41.)  "Can  a  devil  open  the 
eyes  of  the  blind?"  (John  x.  21.)  "The  deoils 
also  believe,  and  tremble."     (James  ii.  19.) 

"  Upon  the  same  principle  that  the  devil  can  be 
philosophized  into  a  figure  of  speech,  or  a  personi- 
fication of  a  bad  principle,  can  the  almighty  Je- 
hovah be  figured  out  of  existence  as  a  real  being 
and  proved  to  be  nothing  more  than  an  eastern 
metaphor  or  rhetorical  flourish."  God  and  the 
devil  are  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures  as  opposites. 
God  is  spoken  of  as  the  author  of  good,  and  the 
devil  as  the  source  of  evil.     If  the  one  is  a  figure 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  849 

of  speech,  so  also  the  other.  By  this  process  of 
reasoning  we  would  soon  reach  the  barren  fields  of 
atheism. 

To  show  still  further  the  absurdity  of  the  Uni- 
versalists'  method  of  interpreting  the  Scriptures, 
we  will  examine  a  few  more  texts.  "  Then  shall 
he  say  also  unto  them  on  the  left  hand.  Depart 
from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared 
for," — whom?  The  Roman  governments  The 
scribes  and  Pharisees'?  Or  perhaps  the  disease  and 
his  angels?  Ko;  Jesus  says,  ^'for  the  devil  and  his 
angels. '^  (Matt.  xxv.  41.)  Could  language  be  any 
more  specific  than  this?  The  devil  is  spoken  of  as 
a  real  being.  If  Universalism  is  true,  the  Bible 
may  turn  out  to  be  all  figure,  with  nothing  real 
in  it. 

The  temptation  of  Christ,  recorded  in  Matt.  iv. 
1-11,  furnishes  proof  conclusive  "that  the  devil  is  a 
real  being,  and  not  a  mere  personification  of  that 
which  is  evil.  ''  Then  was  Jesus  led  up  of  the 
Spirit  into  the  wilderness  to  be  tempted  of  the 
devil."  Would  it  make  any  kind  of  sense  to  say 
that  he  was  led  up  into  the  wilderness  to  be  tempt- 
of  the  disease,  or  by  some  Pharisee,  or  even  by  the 
Boman  government f  "And  when  the  tempter 
came  to  him,  he  said,  If  thou  be  the  Son  of  God, 
command  that  these  stones  be  made  bread." 
(Verse  3.)     Can  a  disease  talk?     Who  represented 


350  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

the  Eoman  government  in  this  temptation  ? 
"  Then  the  devil  taketh  him  up  into  the  holy  city, 
and  setteth  him  on  a  pinnacle  of  the  temple." 
(Yerse  5.)  What  manner  of  disease  could  that 
have  been  ?  or,  what  was  the  name  of  the  scribe 
or  Pharisee  that  took  him  ?  In  the  eighth  verse  it 
says  that  the  devil  took  him  to  a  high  mountain, 
and  then  asked  him  to  fall  down  and  worship 
him.  That  must  have  been  an  extraordinary  dis- 
ease, or  a  very  presumptuous  Pharisee  ?  What- 
ever or  whoever  it  was  that  tempted  Christ  came 
to  him  and  went  away  from  him.  "Who  was  he? 
where  did  he  come  from?  where  did  he  go?" 
It  is  worse  than  nonsense  to  say  that  it  w^as  some 
kind  of  disease.  It  will  not  do  to  say  that  it  was 
a  personification  of  any  evil  principle  in  Christ, 
for  h"e  was  "holy,  harmless,  and  undefiled."  It 
would  hardly  make  sense  to  say  that  it  was  the 
Roman  government.  If  it  was  some  scribe  or 
Pharisee,  his  name  would  have  been  given,  and  he 
would  have  been  called  a  man  and  not  the  devil. 
Nicodemus  came  to  Christ,  but  his  name  and  posi- 
tion were  both  given.  "If  the  devil,  which  came 
to  Christ  and  went  aw^ay  from  him,  was  not  a  real 
being, — nothing  but  a  figure  of  speech, —  then 
what  were  the  angels  which  came  to  him  after  the 
devil  left  him?  If  they  were  nothing  but  meta- 
phors, how   can   any   man   on  earth  prove   that 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  351 

Christ  was  a  real  being  ?  He  can  not  do  it,  as  we 
have  two  metaphors  against  the  idea ;  and  there  is 
just  as  much  reason  in  supposing  that  Christ  was 
a  metaphor  as  either  of  the  others.  But  if  the 
angels  were  real  beings,  and  Christ  a  real  being, 
how  can  it  be  supposed  that  the  devil  was  nothing 
but  a  figure  of  speech  when  he  had  fully  as  much 
to  do  in  the  performance  as  any  of  them  ?  " 

The  devils  which  were  cast  out  by  Christ  and 
his  apostles  were  called  spirits  (jmcuraa).  Could 
this  Avord,  with  any  degree  of  propriety,  be  applied 
to  diseases  ?  ''  When  the  even  was  come,  they 
brought  unto  him  many  that  were  possessed  with 
devils :  and  he  cast  out  the  spirits  \_pneamata'\  with 
his  word,  and  healed  all  that  were  sick."  (Matt, 
viii.  16.)  Here  is  a  manifest  distinction  between 
devils  and  diseases.  Moreover,  the  devils  are  call- 
ed spirits.  "And  when  he  had  called  unto  him  hiff 
twelve  disciples,  he  gave  them  power  against  un- 
clean spirits  \_2Wcnm.atoi'i^^,  to  cast  them  out,  and  to 
heal  all  manner  of  sickness  and  all  manner  of 
disease."  (Matt.  x.  1).  Observe,  the  disciples 
went  out  with  authority  to  "heal  all  man- 
ner of  sickness  and  all  manner  of  disease." 
This  would  embrace  every  possible  disease, 
both  of  the  body  and  mind.  And  besides 
this,  they  had  power  to  cast  out  unclean  spirits. 


352  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

Now,  why  this  distinction  if  devil,  unclean  spirit, 
and  disease  all  mean  the  same  thing  ? 

"And  Jesus  rebuked  him,  saying,  Hold  thy 
peace,  and  come  out  of  him.  And  when  the  un- 
clean spirit  [pjieitmd]  had  torn  him,  and  cried 
with  a  loud  voice,  he  came  out  of  him."  (Mark 
i.  25,  26.)  Here  the  unclean  spirit  is  addressed  as 
a  real  being.  "  Hold  thy  peace."  "  He  [the  un- 
clean spirit]  came  out  of  him."  The  unclean 
spirit  cried  out.  But,  says  the  objector,  it  was  the 
man  himself  that  cried  out.  Not  so.  Whoever 
or  whatever  it  was  that  cried  out  was  the  same 
that  came  out  of  the  man.  Now^  read  and  see: 
*'And  when  the  unclean  spirit  had  torn  him,  and 
cried  with  a  loud  voice,  he  [the  unclean  spirit] 
came  out  of  him."  If  it  was  the  man  himself 
that  cried  out,  then  it  was  the  man  himself  that 
tore  himself,  and  came  out  of  himself.  How  could 
a  man  come  out  of  himself?  But,  says  the  ob- 
jector, it  was  some  terrible  disease.  Can  a  disease 
talk,  and  cry  out? 

It  would  hardly  seem  necessary  to  pursue  this 
thought  any  further.  But  if  the  reader  desires 
anything  more  on  this  point,  he  may  turn  to  Luke 
iv.  36;  Acts  xvi.  16-18;  Acts  xix.  11-17.  In  all 
these  passages  the  devils  that  were  cast  out  were 
called  spirits.  It  should  be  observed  that  the 
Greek  word,  pneuma,  which  is  rendered  spirit,  is 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  353 

the  word  used  in  the  ISTew  Testament  to  denote 
the  Spirit  of  God.  Mr.  Lee,  who  examined  this 
part  of  the  subject  with  a  great  deal  of  care,  says, 
"The  word  (pneuma)  has  no  signification  in 
Greek,  which  it  can  be  made  to  bear  in  the  de- 
moniac possessions  described,  which  will  give  to 
the  texts  a  clear  sense  which  will  not  include  the 
common  idea  of  the  existence  of  devils  or  evil 
spirits.  The  word  can  mean  nothing  else  in  the 
connections  in  which  it  is  used.  This  last  remark 
is  true  of  all  the  words  used  to  denote  these  evil 
spirits,  devil,  Satan,  and  spirit." 

The  devil  is  characterized  by  various  epithets, 
such  as  the  godandprinceof  this  world,  the  prince 
of  the  power  of  the  air,  the  prince  of  darkness, 
Belial,  the  accuser,  the  tempter,  deceiver,  liar,  etc. 
Any  and  all  efforts  made  to  prove  that  this  arch- 
foe  is  merely  a  symbolical  person,  or  principle  of 
evil  personified,  is  in  direct  opposition  to  any  ra- 
tional interpretation  of  God's  word.  As  well 
might  we  attempt  to  show  that  our  Savior  had  no 
real  existence — that  he  was  only  a  personification 
of  some  virtue  or  goodness.  If  Christ  and  the 
apostles  did  not  cast  out  real  devils  —  personal 
beings — they  deceived  the  people  ;  for  the  people 
believed  in  the  existence  of  evil  spirits  or  demons, 
and  both  Christ  and  the  apostles  professed  to  cast 
them  out. 

23 


354  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

Inconsistent  and  "unreasonable  as  it  may  seem  to 
be,  Universalists,  in  order  to  make  their  system 
hold  together,  must  explain  away  all  these  passages 
that  so  plainly  and  clearly  teach  the  personal  ex- 
istence of  devils  or  evil  spirits.  Indeed,  they  at- 
tempt to  explain  away  every  fundamental  doctrine 
of  the  Bible.  To  make  this  last  remark  good,  I 
will  state  some  of  the  principal  doctrines  which 
they  deny :  They  deny  the  doctrine  of  holiness,  or 
Christian  perfection ;  deny  the  doctrine  of  deprav- 
ity; deny  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith; 
deny  the  doctrine  of  a  sj)i ritual  regeneration ;  deny 
the  common  doctrine  of  salvation ;  deny  the  moral 
agency  of  man;  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ;  deny 
the  doctrine  of  the  vicarious  atonement  of  Christ ; 
virtually  deny  the  immortality  of  the  soul ;  deny 
the  doctrine  of  a  future  general  judgment;  deny 
all  future  rewards  or  punishments ;  deny  the  ex- 
istence of  devils  and  evil  spirits.  N'ow,  when  by 
figures,  metaphors,  personifications,  and  innumer- 
able assertions  we  shall  have  frittered  all  these  doc- 
trines away,  what  have  we  left  to  lean  upon  ?  The 
system  of  Universalism,  when  rightly  understood, 
is  but  little  better  than  downright  infidelity. 

Reader,  know  what  Universalism  is  before  you 
embrace  it.  It  promises"  you  endless  life ;  but  on 
what  conditions?  Simply  no  conditions  at  all. 
The  wickedest  man  in  the  world  is  just  as  safe  as 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  355 

the  most  devout  Christian.  It  says  to  the  skeptic 
and  the  atheist,  "You  shall  be  saved,  no  matter 
how  you  live  nor  how  you  die.  "Theirs  is  a  con- 
version which  changes  no  man's  character;  it  is  a 
regeneration  which  leaves  the  heart  unrenewed.  It 
presents  a  profession  which  a  man  may  put  on  with- 
out restraining  one  bad  passion  or  renouncing  one 
evil  habit."  As  a  system,  it  knows  nothing  about 
the  precious  blood  of  Jesus,  which  cleanseth  from 
all  sin.  Again  I  say,  know  what  Universalism  is 
before  you  risk  your  eternal  all  upon  it.  "  Be  not 
deceived ;  God  is  not  mocked:  for  whatsoever  a  man 
sowethy  that  shall  he  also  reap." 


356  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 


CHAPTER  XXIL 

BRIEF  COMMENTS    ON  THE  PRINCIPAL  TEXTS    OF  SCRIPT- 
URE   USUALLY    RELIED    UPON    BY    UNIVERSAL- 
ISTS    TO    PROVE    THEIR   DOCTRINE. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  to  comment  at  length  on 
any  of  the  texts  which  we  may  examine.  On 
most  of  the  passages  a  few  words  will  suffice  to 
show  that  Universalists  have  no  right  to  press  them 
into  their  service.  Every  Bible  reader  must  know 
that  by  taking  a  passage  here  and  there  he  can 
prove  almost  anything ;  but  all  taken  together  it 
will  not  only  explain  itself,  but  harmonize. 

"For  the  earnest  expectation  of  the  creature 
waiteth  for  the  manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God. 
For  the  creature  was  made  subject  to  vanity,  not 
willingly,  but  by  reason  of  him  who  hath  subjected 
the  same  in  hope;  because  the  creature  itself  also 
shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption 
into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God. 
For  we  know  that  the  whole  creation  groan eth 
and  travaileth  in  pain  together  until  now.  And 
not  only  they,  but  ourselves  also,  which  have  the 
first-fruits  of  the  Spirit,  even  we  ourselves  groan 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  35? 

within  ourselves,  waiting  for  the  adoption,  to-vvit, 
the  redemption  of  our  body/'  (Rom.  viii.  19-23.) 
This  text  is  relied  upon  by  most  Universalists  as  a 
very  strong  proof  of  the  ultimate  holiness  and  sal- 
vation of  all  men.  It  is  claimed  (and  we  shall  ad- 
mit) that  creature  and  creation  are  translated  from 
the  same  Greek  word.  Now  admitting  that  create 
ure  and  creation  mean  the  same  thing,  would  it 
not  include  the  whole  universe?  Do  not  the 
earth,  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  together  with  all  ani- 
mals and  insects,  belong  to  this  whole  creation  7 
Why  apply  it  simply  to  the  race  of  man  ?  If  you 
limit  the  words  ''•whole  creation^'  to  mean  only  the 
human  family,  then  by  the  same  rule  of  interpre- 
tation we  may  so  limit  them  as  to  mean  only  a 
part  of  the  human  race. 

There  are  two  or  three  words  used  by  the  apos- 
tle which  teach  very  plainly  that  whatever  he 
meant  by  creature  and  creation  he  did  not  include 
the  whole  race  of  mankind.  Take  for  example 
the  foUowino:  words:  "The  creature  waiteth  for 
the  manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God."  (Rom. 
viii.  19.)  "  The  creature  itself  also  shall  be  deliv- 
ered *  *  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  chil- 
dren of  God."  (Rom.  viii.  21.)  "  The  whole  crea- 
tion groaneth  and  travaileth  in  pain  together  until 
now.  And  not  only  they,  but  ourselves  also, 
which  have  the  first-fruits  of  the  Spirit."     (Rom. 


858  UNIVERSAL    RESTORATION 

viii.  22,  23.)  Kow  if,  as  Universalists  claim,  the 
words  creature  and  creation  include  the  whole  race 
of  man,  then  the  sons  of  God  and  the  children  of 
God  are  no  part  of  that  whole  creation.  "The 
whole  creation  groaneth,  *  *  and  not  only  they, 
but  ourselves  also.'^  Does  not  this  prove  that  our- 
selves was  no  part  of  that  '^whole  creation.^' 

The  point  in  the  argument  is  this :  Universalists 
claim  that  creature  and  creation  mean  the  same 
thing,  and  include  the  whole  race  of  mankind,  and 
therefore  all  men  will  ultimately  be  saved.  The 
criticism  is,  that  whatever  the  apostle  intended  to 
teach  by  creature  and  creation  he  did  not  in  the 
use  of  those  terms  intend  to  embrace  the  whole  race 
of  mankind.  "  The  creature  waiteth  for  the  man- 
ifestation of  the  sons  of  God."  By  creation,  or 
creature^  the  apostle  does  not  include  Christians  or 
the  sons  of  God. 

"  The  creature  ivas  inade  subject  to  vanity.''^ 
From  this  it  is  claimed  that  God  made  man  im- 
perfect, with  a  liability  to  sin»  This  interpretation 
is  proved  false,  for  the  Scriptures  declare  that  God 
^'made  man  upright" — ^'in  his  own  image.''  Sub- 
ject to  vanity^  in  this  passage,  means  pain,  sick- 
ness, and  death,  and  not  moral  imperfection. 

I.  Corinthians,  chapter  xv.  The  first  point  to 
settle  in  our  minds  is  this.  Will  the  resurrection 
of  the  body  change  the  moral   character   of  the 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  359 

soul  ?  Is  auythiijg  more  to  bo  niised  up  tliiiii  tlio 
body?  ISlow,  unless  the  soul  is  mortal  and  dies 
with  the  body,  the  resurrection  can  not  change  its 
moral  nature.  In  verse  22,  Paul  teaches  the  doc- 
trine of  a  general  resurrection,  "As  in  Adam  all  die, 
even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive."  "By 
man  came  death ;  by  man  came  also  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead."  ''  So  sure  as  all  have  been 
subjected  to  death  by  Adam,  so  sure  shall  all  be 
raised  again  by  Christ  Jesus."  But  does  the  fact 
of  a  general  resurrection  prove  that  all  will  be 
holy  in  the  resurrection?  By  no  means;  for  in 
the  twenty-third  verse  the  apostle  explains  wdiat 
he  means  by  a  general  resurrection.  *'  But  every 
man  in  his  own  order:  Christ  the  first-fruits; 
afterward  they  that  are  Christ's  at  his  coming." 
But  are  all  Christ's  ?  Paul,  in  Romans  viii.  9,  says : 
"  If  any  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  in 
none  of  his."  Have  all  men  the  spirit  of  Christ? 
Again  Paul  declares  that  "  the  dead  in  Christ  shall 
rise  first."  Do  all  men — infidels,  atheists,  and 
blasphemers  —die  in  Christ  ?  Take  Christ's  own 
words,  John  v.  28,  29:  "The  hour  is  coming,  in 
the  which  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his 
voice,  and  shall  come  forth  ;  they  that  have  done 
good,  unto  the  resurrection  of  life ;  and  they  that  ^ 
have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation." 
Add  to  this  the  language  of  Paul,  in  Acts  xxiv.  15  : 


360  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

*'  There  shall  be  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  both  of 
the  just  and  unjust."  ^Now  compare  these  passages 
with  I.  Cor.  XV.  23,  now  under  consideration :  "  But 
every  man  in  his  own  order :  Christ  the  first-fruits ; 
afterward  they  that  are  Christ's  at  his  coming." 
Thus  while  Paul  teaches  the  doctrine  of  a  general 
resurrection,  he  also  teaches  that  there  will  be  a 
distinction  of  character  in  the  resurrection. 

Before  this  chapter  can  be  used  to  prove  the  ul- 
timate holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men,  the  fol- 
lowing points  will  have  to  be  established:  (1.) 
That  there  will  be  but  one  order  or  class  of  char- 
acter in  the  resurrection.  (2.)  That  all  who  die 
out  of  Christ  will  be  raised  in  Christ.  (3.)  That 
the  physical  power  of  God  exerted  in  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body  will  change  the  moral  charac- 
ter of  the  soul.  (4.)  That  it  makes  no  difierence 
how  men  live  nor  how  they  die,  whether  infidels, 
atheists,  or  Christians,  they  will  all  be  raised  in 
Christ.  (5.)  That  it  was  foolish  for  Paul  to  urge 
his  brethren  (I.  Cor.  xv.  58)  to  be  ''steadfast,  un- 
movable,  always  abounding  in  the  work  of  the 
Lord,"  when  he  must  have  known  that  it  would 
make  no  possible  difierence  in  the  end,  but  that  the 
worst  man  would  fare  just  as  well  in  the  resuiTCc- 
tion  as  the  most  devout  Christian. 

"All  the  ends  of  the  world  shall  remember  and 
turn  unto  the  Lord:  and  all  the  kindreds  of  the 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  361 

nations  shall  worship  before  thee."  (PsaUns  xxii. 
27.)  This  is  a  prophecy  concerning  the  gospel  age, 
when  there  should  be  a  great  ingathering  into  the 
fold  of  Christ.  But  up  to  this  time  it  has  not 
been  literally  fulHUed.  Millions  have  died  who  did 
not  remember  and  turn  to  the  Lord;  they  did  not 
worship  before  him.  Is  it  anywhere  said  that  those 
who  did  not  remember  and  turn  to  the  Lord  while 
on  earth  would  do  so  after  death?  Mark  the  lan- 
guage. It  does  not  say  that  all  the  nations  of  the 
dead  shall  remember  and  turn  to  the  Lord.  It 
does  not  say  that  all  the  nations  of  hell  shall  re- 
member and  turn  to  the  Lord.  When,  then,  will 
those  remember  and  turn  to  the  Lord  who  did  not 
do  so  while  on  earth  ?  It  will  not  do  to  say  in  the 
resurrection  ;  for  if  Universalism  be  true  all  are  to 
be  changed  in  the  resurrection,  and  hence  there 
will  be  no  time  nor  necessity  for  remembering  and 
returning  to  the  Lord.  All  will  be  turned  to  the 
Lord  when  they  are  resurrected.  But  the  context 
shows  that  this  prophecy  relates  to  the  nations  of 
the  earth,  and  while  they  are  on  the  earth. 

"All  nations  whom  thou  hast  made  shall 
come  and  worship  before  thee,  0  Lord;  and 
shall  glorify  thy  name."  (Psalms  Ixxxri.  9.)  This, 
too,  is  a  prophecy  concerning  gospel  times,  when 
the  word  of  God  should  be  proclaimed  among  all 
the  gentiles.     But  all  nations  have  not  at  anytime 


362  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

in  the  past  worshiped  before  the  Lord.  They 
do  not  now  worship  before  the  Lord.  Millions 
have  died  who  did  not  come  and  worship  before 
the  Lord.  How,  then,  are  w^e  to  understand  the 
text?  In  the  first  place,  the  word  shall  is  not  al- 
ways to  be  taken  in  an  absolute  sense.  Moses  said 
that  the  Lord  would  raise  up  a  prophet,  and  con- 
cluded by  saying,  "  Him  shall  ye  hear."  But  did 
all  hear  that  prophet  (Christ)  when  he  came  ?  l^o ; 
the  great  majorit}^  rejected  him.  The  gospel  was 
to  be  preached  among  all  nations;  and  Peter's  un- 
derstanding of  it  was  that  God  was  no  respecter 
of  persons.  ^'J3ut  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth 
him  and  w^orketh  righteousness  is  accepted  with 
him."  This  is  the  sum  of  all  this  class  of  prophecy. 
In  the  gospel  age  salvation  through  Jesus  Christ 
was  to  be  offered  to  all  nations;  many  would  ac- 
cept the  offer  and  turn  to  the  Lord.  So  it  has  been, 
and  so  it  is  now. 

"  The  Lord  is  good  to  all :  and  his  tender  mercies 
are  over  all  his  works."  (Psalms  cxlv.  9.)  This 
is  a  beautiful  passage  of  scripture,  and  teaches  us 
the  constant  and  tender  care  of  our  heavenly  Fa- 
ther. But  it  is  very  far  from  teaching  the  doctrine 
of  Ilniversalism.  Observe  three  points :  (1.)  God  is 
good  and  merciful  now.  (2.)  Some  men  are  sinful 
now  ;  not  because  God  is  good,  but  notwithstanding 
his  goodness.    (3.)  God  is  immutable.    He  is  as  good 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  363 

and  merciful  now  as  he  ever  has  been  or  ever  will 
be.  Sin  has  existed,  and  does  now  exist.  There- 
fore, God  will  never  be  so  good  and  merciful  as 
not  to  permit  sin  and  misery  to  exist.  If  because 
God  is  good  and  merciful  he  will  not  punish  sin 
eternally,  he  is  too  good  and  merciful  to  punish 
sin  at  all.  But  Universalists  say  he  does  punish 
men  for  sin — punishes  them  to  the  full  extent  of 
the  law.  If,  therefore,  the  law  requires  endless 
punishment,  there  is  nothing  in  the  goodness  and 
mercy  of  God  to  prevent  him  from  punishing  eter- 
nally. 

"The  desire  of  the  righteous  shall  be  granted." 
(Prov.  X.  24.)  The  desire  of  the  righteous,  so  far 
as  his  own  personal  salvation  is  concerned,  shall 
be  granted.  Every  truly  righteous  man  is  con- 
stantly desiring  more  of  the  presence  of  God. 
This,  and  kindred  desires,  will  be  granted  to  him ; 
"for  the  path  of  the  just  is  as  a  shining  light, 
that  shineth  more  and  more."  But  the  desire  of 
the  righteous,  in  a  general  sense,  may  not  be 
granted.  'The  righteous  desire  the  present  salva- 
tion of  all  men  just  as  much  as  they  desire  the 
future  salvation  of  all  men.  But  all  men  are  not 
now  saved ;  therefore  the  desire  of  the  righteous  re- 
specting the  wicked  is  not  granted.  Find  me  a 
man  that  does  not  desire  the  present  salvation  of 
all  men  and  I  will  find  you  a  man   that  is  not 


364  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

righteous.  All  righteous  men,  in  all  time  past, 
have  desired  the  present  salvation  of  mankind ; 
and  yet  none  of  those  desires  were  granted.  Jesus 
says,  "Many  prophets  and  righteous  men  de- 
sired to  see  those  things  which  ye  see,  and  have 
not  seen  them."  (Matt.  xiii.  17.)  So  it  seems  that 
the  desire  of  prophets  and  righteous  men  was  not 
always  granted  ^ 

"He  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul,  and 
shall  be  satisfied.''  (Isaiah  liii.  11.)  This 
prophecy  refers  to  Christ,  and  the  great  number 
that  will  be  saved  through  him;  but  it  by  no 
means  proves  that  all  men  will  be  saved  through 
him.  I^or  are  we  to  understand  this  text  in  that 
general  sense.  Christ  has  not  seen  the  travail  of 
his  soul;  nor  is  he  satisfied,  unless  we  assert 
that  he  is  now  satisfied  with  the  wickedness  of  the 
wicked.  He  most  earnestly  desired  the  salvation 
of  Jerusalem,  and  wept  over  it ;  and  yet  he  said, 
"  Ye  will  not  come  unto  me."  Was  he  satisfied 
with  that  wicked  people?  "Christ,  however,  is 
satisfied  with  what  he  has  done  in  bringing  about 
and  completing  a  plan  of  salvation."  All  may  be 
saved  if  they  will. 

"  My  counsel  shall  stand,  and  I  will  do  all  my 
pleasure."  (Isaiah  xlvi.  10.)  What  God  has  de- 
termined shall  be  done.  He  determined  to  create 
a  world,  and  he  did  it.    God  has  a  counsel  concern- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  365 

ing  the  children  of  men,  and  it  will  stand  forever. 
He  has  determined  that ''  whosoever  believeth  and 
is  baptized  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned."  When  he  created  man  he 
determined  that  he  should  be  a  moral  agent,  and 
be  eternally  responsible  for  his  conduct.  God  as 
much  determined  that  the  wicked  and  the  nations 
that  forget  God  should  be  turned  into  hell  as  he 
determined  to  save  the  righteous  in  heaven. 
God's  counsel  will  stand.  But  it  is  said  that  he 
will  do  all  his  pleasure.  What  is  the  pleasure  of 
the  Lord  ?  Is  it  not  to  maintain  the  honor,  purity, 
and  dignity  of  his  government?  Is  it  not  as 
much  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  to  be  just  as  it  is  to 
be  merciful  ?  Universalists  would  say  that  it  is 
the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  to  punish  sinners  for 
their  sins,  because  the  law  demands  it.  If,  then, 
the  law  should  demand  endless  punishment  it  will 
be  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  to  inflict  it. 

Mr.  Guild,  page  378,  says,  ^'  We  (Universalists) 
are  the  only  people  on  earth  who  believe  that  God 
will  in  very  deed  render  to  every  man  according 
to  his  deeds.  We  are  the  only  people  who  do  not 
provide  some  way  for  the  sinner  to  escape  the  just 
punishment  of  his  sins."  Here  it  is  in  plain 
terms.  Universalists  provide  no  way  to  escape. 
They  have  no  such  thing  in  their  whole  system  as 
salvation.     No  deliverance  from  the  punishment 


366  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

due  to  sin.  Then  it  is  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  to 
punish  sinners  for  their  sins.  Inasmuch,  there- 
fore, as  the  claims  of  the  law  (as  shown  in  chapter 
XX.)  are  as  eternal  as  God  himself,  it  will  be  the 
pleasure  of  the  Lord  to  punish  sinners  for  their 
sins,  world  without  end.  The  theory  of  Univer- 
salism,  if  it  proves  anything  at  all,  proves  the  end- 
less damnation  of  the  whole  human  race. 

Mr.  Guild,  on  page  378,  says  that  "  the  punish- 
ment of  sin  is  certain  and  sure,  and  absolutely  un- 
escapable  and  unavoidable."  There  is  no  escape. 
ITow  I  assume  that  no  sinner  can  by  any  possibil- 
ity suiter  the  fuU  penalty  of  the  law.  Mr.  Lee 
says,  "  The  sinner  can  not  receive  all  the  punish- 
ment he  deserves  until  a  space  of  time  shall  have 
elapsed  after  he  shall  have  ceased  to  commit  sin, 
and  he  can  never  cease  to  commit  sin  while  he  is 
in  a  state  of  condemnation  and  punishment."  'No 
man  can  render  perfect  obedience  to  the  law  while 
he  is  suffering  the  penalty  of  the  law.  And  as 
Universalists  have  no  way  of  escape  from  the 
punishment  due  to  sin,  they  consign  the  whole 
fiimily  of  man  to  endless  punishment.  From  this 
conclusion  there  is  no  escape. 

"And  this  is  the  Father's  will  which  hath 
sent  me,  that  of  all  which  he  hath  given  me  I 
should  lose  nothing,  but  should  raise  it  up  again 
at  the  last  day."     (John  vi.  39.)     Lest  some  one 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.         •  367 

should  misunderstand  the  import  of  the  Savior's 
language,  he  adds  in  the  next  verse  an  explana- 
tion :  "And  this  is  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  me, 
that  every  one  which  seeth  the  Son  and  believeth 
on  him  may  have  everlasting  life  :•  and  I  will  raise 
him  up  at  the  last  day."  Thousands  do  not  be- 
lieve in  Jesus  Christ.  They  live  and  die  in  unbe- 
lief and  sin ;  and  the  promise  in  the  text,  as 
explained  by  our  Savior  himself,  only  refers  to 
such  as  do  believe  in  him.  Judas  was  given  to 
Christ  just  as  much  as  Peter  and  John  were,  yet 
Jesus  says  plainly  that  he  lost  him.  "God  may 
loill  a  thing  to  be  without  willing  that  it  shall  he^ 
God  wills  that  all  men  should  pray;  but  all  men 
do  not  pray.  There  is,  therefore,  a  diiference  be- 
tween willing  a  thing  to  be  and  willing  that  it 
shall  be. 

But  what  loss  did  our  Lord  speak  of?  Did  he 
mean  that  he  had  lost  none  in  this  world?  If 
Universalism  be  true,  there  was  no  danger  of  any 
one  being  lost  either  in  this  world  or  in  the  world  to 
come.  Why  then  say  that  he  had  lost  none,  when 
there  was  no  possibility  of  losing  any  one?  All 
are  to  be  unconditionally  saved.  Our  Lord  would 
not  talk  of  that  which  was  not  and  could  not  pos- 
sibly be. 

"And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will 
draw  all  men  unto  me."     (John  xii.  32.)     Did  our 


368  CAREFULLY  EXAMINED. 

Lord  mean  that  he  would  compel  all  men  to  come 
unto  him  ?  When  is  this  drawing  to  occur  ?  Mill- 
ions have  died  that  were  not  drawn  to  Christ 
When  will  they  come  ?  IN'ow  if  you  will  turn  to 
John  iii.  14,  IS,  you  will  see  just  what  our  Savior 
meant.  "And  as  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  ir.  the 
wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  man  be  lifted 
up :  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  shall  not 
perish,  but  have  eternal  life."  Here  we  are  taught 
in  unmistakable  language  that  this  coming  to 
Christ  is  conditional.  The  Son  of  man  was  to  be 
lifted,  and  whosoever  w^ould  believe  in  him  should 
have  eternal  life.  This  is  the  uniform  doctrine  of 
the  Bible;  and  wherever  the  conditions  are  not 
expressed,  they  are  always  implied. 

"  Wherefore,  as  by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the 
world,  and  death  by  sin ;  and  so  death  passed 
upon  all  men,  for  that  all  men  have  sinned :  (for 
until  the  law  sin  was  in  the  world :  but  sin  is  not 
imputed  when  there  is  no  law.  Nevertheless 
death  reigned  from  Adam  to  Moses,  even  over 
them  that  had  not  sinned  after  the  similitude  of 
Adam's  transgression,  who  is  the  figure  of  him 
that  was  to  come.  But  not  as  the  offense,  so  also 
is  the  free  gift:  for  if  through  the  offense  of  one 
many  be  dead,  much  more  the  grace  of  God,  and 
the  gift  by  grace,  which  is  by  one  man,  Jesus 
Christ,  hath  abounded  unto  many.     And  not  as  it 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  369 

was  by  one  that  sinned,  so  is  the  gift:  for  the 
judgment  was  by  one  to  condemnation,  but  the 
free  gift  is  of  many  offenses  unto  justification. 
For  if  by  one  man's  offense  death  reigned  by  one ; 
much  more  they  which  receive  abundance  of  • 
grace  and  of  the  gift  of  righteousness  shall  reign 
in  life  by  one,  Jesus  Christ.)  Therefore,  as  by  the 
offense  of  one  judgment  came  upon  all  men  to 
condemnation;  even  so  by  the  righteousness  of 
one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  unto  justifica- 
tion of  life.  For  as  by  one  man's  disobedience 
many  were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience  of 
one  shall  many  be  made  righteous.  Moreover  the 
law  entered,  that  the  offense  might  abound.  But 
where  sin  abounded,  grace  did  much  more  abound: 
That  as  sin  hath  reigned  unto  death,  even  so 
might  grace  reign  through  righteousness  unto 
eternal  life  by  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."  (Romans 
V.  12-21.) 

This  portion  of  scripture  has  been  used  to  prove 
the  ultimate  holiness  and  salvation  of  all  men. 
But  before  it  can  be  successfully  pressed  into  the 
service  of  Universalism,  a  number  of  points  will 
have  to  be  established.  (1.)  It  will  have  to  be 
shown  that  justification  (verse  18)  means  uncon- 
ditional deliverance  from  actual  transgression. 
Paul  declares,  in  verse  1,  that  men  are  justi- 
fied by  faith,  thus  proving  that  whatever  blessing 

24 


870  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

comes  to  us  through  the  obedience  of  Christ  is 
conditional.  When  Paul  speaks  of  j ustification, 
or  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  he  puts  faith  as  the  con- 
dition. But  here  he  puts  no  conditions.  There- 
fore this  justification  of  life  "  means  the  decree  or 
judgment  that  determines  the  resurrection  from 
the  dead."  (2.)  It  will  have  to  be  shown  how 
men  are  made  righteous  by  the  obedience  of 
Christ.  Universalists  deny  the  doctrine  of  vica- 
rious atonement  and  of  justification  by  faith.  How 
then  are  men  to  be  made  righteous  through  the 
obedience  of  Christ?  (3.)  It  must  be  made  to  ap- 
pear that  the  abounding  grace  (verse  20)  refers  to 
the  number  saved  and  not  to  the  number  and  mag- 
nitude of  the  sins  from  which  they  are  saved.  But 
this  can  not  be  the  meaning  of  the  text,  for  then 
it  would  prove  that  more  would  be  saved  in  Christ 
than  were  lost  in  Adam.  To  show  clearly  that 
the  abounding  grace  refers  to  the  number  and  mag- 
nitude of  sins  from  which  men  are  saved,  and  not 
to  the  number  of  persons  saved,  we  refer  to  verse 
16,  where  the  apostle  says  that  the  free  gift  is  of 
many  offenses  unto  justification. 

Further:  "What  the  apostle  calls  the  abounding 
of  grace  in  verse  20  he  calls  the  abundance  of 
grace,  and  the  gift  of  righteousness  in  verse  17: 
''  For  if  by  one  man's  offense  death  reigned  by 
one;  much  more  they  which  receive   abundance 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  871 

of  grace  aud  of  the  gift  of  righteousness  shall 
reign  in  life  by  one,  Jesus  Christ."  But  who  are 
to  share  in  the  abundance  of  grace,  and  reign  in 
life  V  Paul  says  those  who  receive  it.  Do  all  men 
receive  it  ?  John  i.  12,  says,  "  As  many  as  receiv- 
ed him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the 
sons  of  God."  Jesus  said,  "I  am  come  in  my 
Father's  name,  and  ye  receive  me  not."  (John 
V.  43.) 

The  plain,  simple  meaning  of  the  passage  is 
this:  (1.)  All  Avere  lost  in  Adam.  "By  one  man 
sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death  by  sin."  (2.) 
Christ  provided  salvation  for  all.  (3.)  All  who 
receive  this  grace  and  the  gift  of  righteousness 
shall  reign  in  life  with  Jesus  Christ.  (4.)  The  re- 
ceiving of  this  grace  and  the  gift  of  righteousness 
is  conditional.  "Whosoever  will,  may  take  the 
water  of  life  freely."  (5.)  "Where  sin  abounded 
in  the  heart  this  grace  and  gift  of  righteousness, 
w^lien  received  by  faith,  Avill  triumph  over  the 
many  offenses  unto  eternal  life.  Tliis  interpreta- 
tion not  only  harmonizes  the  different  parts  of  this 
passage,  but  is  in  harmony  with  the  Scriptures 
throughout. 

"Having  made  known  unto  us  the  mystery  of 
his  will,  according  to  liis  good  pleasure  which  he 
hath  purposed  in  himself:  that  in  the  dispensa- 
tion of  the  fullness  of  times  he  might  gather  to- 


372  UNIVERSAL  EESTOHATION 

gether  in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are 
in  heaven,  and  which  are  on  earth ;  even  in  him : 
in  whom  also  we  have  obtained  an  inheritance, 
being  predestinated  according  to  the  purpose  of 
him  who  worketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  of 
his  own  will."     (Ephesians  i.  9-11.) 

This  is  regarded  by  Universalists  as  a  very 
strong  text  in  favor  of  their  theory.  A  few  points 
properly  understood,  however,  will  show  that  no 
such  thing  as  the  universal  restoration  of  all  men 

ft 

was  in  the  mind  of  the  apostle.  (1.)  What  are 
we  to  understand  by  the  "  mystery  of  God's  will?" 
Is  it  that  God  will  save  all  men  unconditionally  ? 
Certainly  not;  for  it  has  been  shown  again  and 
again  that  salvation  is  conditional.  The  mystery 
of  God's  will,  which  had  been  hidden  up  to  that 
time,  was  that  the  gentiles  were  to  be  received  into 
the  church  of  God,  and  admitted  to  the  same  priv- 
ileges with  the  Jews,  without  being  required  to 
perform  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Jewish 
law.  This  "  was  a  mystery,  a  hidden  thing ,  which 
had  never  been  published  before.  It  was  God's 
will  that  it  should  be  so." 

The  second  point  to  be  considered  is,  when  this 
gathering  together  into  Christ  is  to  occur.  The 
passage  says  it  is  to  be  "in  the  dispensation  of  the 
fullness  of  times."  "  Is  it  in  death,  or  in  the  resur- 
rection ?     "We  will  let  Paul  tell  us  when  it  is  to  be. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  373 

"  But  when  the  falhiess  of  the  time  was  come,  God 
sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made  under 
the  law."  (Gal.  iv.  4.)  The  fullness  of  time  then 
was  the  gospel  dispensation,  when  both  Jews  and 
gentiles  who  believed  in  Christ  would  be  gathered 
into  one  church  and  constitute  one  family. 

Observe,  it  is  not  affirmed  by  the  apostle  that 
God  will  gather  all  things  in  Christ.  He  simply 
says  that  he  might  do  so.  By  the  suffering  and 
death  of  Jesus  Christ  the  way  was  made  possible, 
so  that  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth  God  and 
worketh  righteousness  will  be  accepted  with  him. 
Paul  says  (Titus  ii.  14.)  that  Christ  "gave  himself 
for  us,  that  he  might  redeem  us  from  all  iniquity, 
and  purify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people,  zealous 
of  good  works."  Are  all  men  redeemed  from  all 
iniquity  ?  Are  all  men  purified  and  made  zealous 
of  good  works?  If  not,  why  not?  Jesus  gave 
himself  for  us  that  he  might  do  this  very  thing; 
and  yet  it  is  not  done. 

The  obvious  meaning  of  the  passage  is  this: 
under  the  gospel  dispensation,  which  is  the  '^ full- 
ness of  time,''  both  Jews  and  gentiles  would  be 
gathered  into  one  church,  and  brought  under  one 
economy  on  precisely  the  same  conditions,  which 
was  that  of  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  This 
will  harmonize  with  what  the  apostle  says  in  the 
next  chapter.    There  he  declares  that  Christ  by  his 


374  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

death  "  hath  broken  down  the  middle  wall  of  parti- 
tion," "that  he  might  reconcile  both  [Jews  and  gen- 
tiles] unto  Grod,  in  one  body  [church],  by  the  cross, 
having  slain  the  enmity  thereby."  This  is  the 
mystery  of  his  will,  which  up  to  that  time  had 
been  hidden,  but  was  now  declared.  This  is  his 
purpose,  and  this  is  the  counsel  of  his  own  will. 
There  is  to  be  under  the  gospel  dispensation  no 
distinction  of  nation  or  previous  condition.  "All 
that  are  saved  of  all  nations  are  to  be  saved  the 
same  way,  namely,  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus?" 
There  is  to  be  one  fold  and  one  Shepherd;  one 
church,  one  family;  for  the  middle  wall  of  the 
partition  has  been  broken  down  and  the  enmity 
slain. 

""Wherefore  God  also  hath  highly  exalted  him, 
and  given  him  a  name  which  is  above  every 
name :  that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee 
should  bow,  of  things  in  heaven,  and  things  in 
earth,  and  things  under  the  earth;  and  that  every 
tongue  should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord, 
to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father."  (Phil.  ii.  9-11.) 
The  first  point  to  settle  is  the  time  wdien  and  the  place 
where  all  are  to  bow  and  confess  Jesus  Christ.  It 
is  a  fact  that  all  have  not  done  so  in  the  past;  all 
do  not  bow  to  and  confess  him  now.  When  will 
they?  Another  point  to  'Q.x  is  this:  because  all 
men  bow  to  and  confess  Jesus  Christ,  that  does 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  375 

not  necessarily  imply  that  all  such  are  saved  or 
will  be  saved.  Devils  may  confess  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  Lord,  but  that  does  not  imply  that  they 
will  be  saved.  I  believe  that  all  intelligent  beings 
in  heaven,  earth,  and  hell  will  sometime  acknowl- 
edge that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  or  "  absolute  gov- 
ernor, and  thus  glorify  God  the  Father.'*  But  I 
am  far  from  believing  that  all  who  may  bow  to 
and  confess  Jesus  Christ  as  Lord  will  be  saved. 
The  words  do  not  imply  this. 

The  words  of  Christ  in  Matthew  x.  32  will  assist 
us  in  understanding  this  passage.  "Whosoever 
therefore  shall  confess  me  before  men,  him  will  I 
confess  also  before  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven." 
But  multitudes  do  not  confess  Jesus  Christ  before 
men;  they  openly  reject  him.  Will  he  confess 
such  before  his  Father?  It  is  one  thing  to  bow 
to  and  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  and  quite 
another  thing  to  be  confessed  of  Christ.  The  in- 
fidel, the  atheist,  and  the  scoffer  will  sometime 
confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord;  that  he  was 
God  manifest  in  the  flesh;  but  that  by  no  means 
implies  their  eternal  salvation.  James  says,  ii.  19, 
''The  devils  also  believe,  and  tremble."  But  that 
by  no  means  proves  that  devils  will  be  saved.  So 
devils  may  bow  to  and  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
Lord  and  still  remain  in  their  condemned  state. 

"  Who  shall  change  our  vile  body,  that  it  may 


876  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

be  fashioned  like  unto  his  glorious  body,  according 
to  the  working  whereby  he  is  able  even  to  subdue 
all  things  unto  himself."  (Phil.  iii.  21.)  Univer- 
salists  claim  that  because  Christ  is  able  to  sub- 
due all  things,  therefore  all  men  will  be  saved. 
Does  the  word  subdue  mean  to  save?  If  it  does, 
then  it  seems  to  me  that  it  would  prove  too  much. 
All  things  are  to  be  subdued.  Are  all  things  to  be 
saved  ? 

The  word  subdue  occurs  perhaps  thirty  times  in 
the  Bible;  but  it  is  not  once  used  in  the  sense  of 
save,  or  being  saved.  A  nation  or  a  city  may  be 
subdued  a  thousand  times  and  not  once  saved.  In 
Judges  iii.  29  it  is  said  that  "Moab  was  subdued." 
But  how  ?  Ten  thousand  men  were  slain  in  the 
work  of  subjugation.  Again,  in  Judges  xi.  33,  it 
is  recorded  that  the  children  of  Ammon  were  sub- 
dued, but  twenty  cities  were  destroyed,  and  there 
was  a  very  great  slaughter  among  the  people.  The 
word  subdue,  as  it  occurs  in  the  Bible,  nearly  al- 
ways means  to  destroy.  All  things  may  be  sub- 
dued unto  Christ,  but  that  is  very  far  from  proving 
that  all  things  will  be  saved. 

"  For  this  is  good  and  acceptable  in  the  sight  of 
i  rod  our  Savior ;  who  will  have  all  men  to  be  saved, 
and  to  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the  truth."  (I. 
Tim.  ii.  3,  4.)  That  it  is  the  will  of  God  that  all 
should  be  saved,  we  have  no  doubt.     But  it  would 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  377 

be  difficult  for  Qniversalists  to  tell  when  and  where 
all  men  are  to  be  saved.  It  is  a  fact  which  they 
will  not  deny,  that  all  men  are  not  now  saved ;  and 
according  to  their  theory  there  is  nothing  in  the 
world  to  come  from  which  they  can  be  saved.  It 
is  the  hight  of  nonsense  for  Universalists  to  talk 
of  being  saved ;  there  is  no  such  thing  as  salvation 
in  their  system.  Yet  they  will  press  into  service 
all  those  passages  which  seem  to  teach  the  salva- 
tion of  all  men.  Lest  some  one  might  say  that  I 
do  not  fairly  represent  Universalism,  I  will  quote 
from  Mr.  Guild,  page  378:  "We  are  the  only 
people  on  earth  who  believe  that  God  will  in  very 
deed  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  deeds. 
We  are  the  only  people  who  do  not  provide  some 
way  for  the  sinner  to  escape  the  just  punishment 
of  his  sins.  We  teach  that  the  punishment  of  sin  is 
certain  and  sure,  and  unescapable  and  unavoidable." 
iN'ow  where  is  there  any  salvation  in  such  a  the- 
ory? What  are  men  saved  from?  If  a  man  is 
punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law,  there  is  no 
salvation  in  it.  Yet  they  say  that  because  God 
wills  the  salvation  of  all  men,  therefore  all  men 
will  be  saved,  just  as  though  they  believed  in  gos- 
pel salvation.  How  is  a  man  to  be  saved  from  his 
sins  when  he  is  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law  ?  How  is  a  man  to  be  saved  from  hell  when 
there  is  none  ? 


378  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

But  God  wills  the  salvation  of  all  men;  and  the 
will  of  the  Lord  must  be  done.  This  argument 
has  been  repeated  a  thousand  times,  and  a  thou- 
sand times  refuted.  G-od  may  will  a  thing  to  he 
without  willing  that  it  shall  be.  Do  all  men  do  the 
will  of  God  now  ?  Is  it  the  will  of  God  that  men 
should  sin?  If  it  is,  why  then  does  he  punish 
them  for  sin?  Will  a  just  and  merciful  God  pun- 
ish men  for  doing  his  will?  God  wills  the  future 
and  eternal  salvation  of  all  men,  just  as  he  wills 
their  present  salvation.  But  all  men  are  not  now 
saved ;  therefore  the  will  of  the  Lord  is  not  done. 

"  This  is  a  faithful  saying,  and  worthy  of  all  ac- 
ceptation. For  therefore  we  both  labor  and  suffer 
reproach,  because  we  trust  in  the  living  God,  who 
is  the  Savior  of  all  men,  specially  of  those  that 
believe."  (I.  Tim.  iv.  9,  10.)  In  w^hat  sense  is 
God  the  Savior  of  all  men  ?  If  Universalism  be 
true,  he  is  not  the  Savior  of  any  man.  From  what 
does  he  save  us  ?  ISTot  from  the  guilt  of  sin ;  not 
from  any  punishment  due  to  sin;  not  from  hell, 
because  there  is  none.  Theirs  is  a  wonderful  sal- 
vation. It  is  a  salvation  from  nothing.  Will  God 
save  a  man  from  sin  after  he  has  punished  him  for 
it?  Can  the  governor  of  a  state  save  a  man  from 
the  penitentiary  after  he  has  been  there  and  served 
out  his  time?  Does  not  the  law  itself  clear  him? 
So  if  God  punishes  a  man  to  the  full  extent  of  the 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  379 

law,  the  law  itself  will  clear  him.  There  is  no 
salvation  in  it. 

The  meaning  of  the  passage  is  this  :  God  is  the 
Savior  of  all  men  in  the  sense  that  he  has  provid- 
ed salvation  for  all.  Jesus,  by  the  grace  of  G  ;d, 
has  tasted  de^th  for  every  man ;  and  whosoever  be- 
lie veth  in  him  shall  not  perish,  but  have  ever- 
lasting life.  God  is  the  special  Savior  of  those 
that  believe  in  the  sense  that  he  now  saves  and  de- 
livers them  from  the  guilt  and  punishment  due  to 
sin.  The  text  under  review  does  not  say  that  he 
will  be  the  Savior  of  all  men,  but  that  he  is, — now, 
at  this  time.  The  invitation  of  the  gospel  is: 
"Come,  for  all  things  are  no?/;  ready."  "Whoso- 
ever will,  let  him  take  the  water  of  life  freely." 
But  thousands  will  not  come.  Jesus  says,  "Ye 
will  not  come  unto  me  that  ye  might  have  life." 
"  What  God  intends  for  all,''  says  Dr.  Clarke,  "he 
actually  gives  to  theyn  that  believe  in  Christ,  who 
died  for  the  sins  of  the  world,  and  tasted  death  for 
every  man.  As  all  have  been  purchased  by  his 
blood,  so  all  may  believe;  and  consequently  all 
may  be  saved.  Those  that  perish,  perish  through 
their  own  fault. 

"For  the  grace  of  God  that  bringeth  salvation 
hath  appeared  to  all  men."  (Titus  ii.  11.)  In 
what  sense  has  this  salvation  appeared  to  all  men  ? 
Are  all  men  now  saved  ?    According  to  Universal- 


380  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

ism  no  man  is  now  saved,  nor  will  be  until  the 
resurrection;  and  even  then  is  not  saved  in  the 
sense  of  being  delivered  from  anything.  But  the 
grace  or  favor  of  God,  which  bringeth  salvation, 
hath  appeared — hath  shone  forth.  *'The  sun  by 
his  rising  in  the  east  shines  out,  and  enlightens 
successively  the  whole  world.  So  the  Lord  Jesus, 
who  is  called  the  Sun  of  Bighteousness  (Mai.  iv.2), 
arises  on  the  whole  human  race  with  healing  in 
his  wings."  Because  the  grace  of  God  that 
bringeth  salvation  to  all  men  hath  appeared,  are 
we  thence  to  infer  that  all  will  be  saved?  It  has 
appeared  to  thousands  who  rejected  it,  and  to 
thousands  who  this  day  reject  it. 

But  observe  that  this  grace  that  bringeth  salva- 
tion teaches  something.  What  does  it  teach? 
That  all  men  will  be  unconditionally  saved  ?  I^ot 
quite.  The  context  says  that  it  teaches  "  us  that 
denying  ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts,  we  should 
live  soberly,  righteously,  and  godly  in  this  present 
world."  But  a  vast  number  to  whom  this  grace 
that  bringeth  salvation  has  appeared  do  not  live 
"  soberly,  righteously,-  and  godly."  Herein  is  the 
condition.  ]N"ow  the  simple  question  is  this,  Will 
those  who  do  not  live  soberly,  righteously,  and 
godly  in  this  present  world  fare  all  the  same  in 
the  world  to  come  as  those  who  do?  "Does  our 
living  godly  in  this  present  world  have  anything 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  381 

to  do  with  the  life  to  come?  Paul  says,  I.  Tim. 
iv.  8, '  Godliness  is  profitable  unto  all  things,  hav- 
ing promise  of  the  life  that  now  is  and  of  that 
which  is  to  come.' "  Universalists  would  have  us 
believe  that  because  the  grace  of  God  that  bring- 
eth  salvation  to  all  men  hath  apj^eared,  therefore 
all  men  will  be  saved  whether  they  live  godly  in 
this  world  or  not.  But  Paul  teaches  no  such  doc- 
trine. We  are  to  live  soberly,  righteously,  and  godly 
in  this  present  world.  One  remark  further.  This 
is  in  the  present  tense.  "  The  grace  of  God  that 
bring  eth  salvation  hath  appeared ; "  not  will  appear 
in  death,  or  in  the  resurrection.  Will  any  man 
venture  to  say  that  all  men  —  infidels,  atheists, 
and  such  persons — do  now  enjoy  this  salvation? 

"  Ask  of  me,  and  I  shall  give  thee  the  heathen 
for  thine  inheritance,  and  the  uttermost  parts  of 
the  earth  for  thy  possessions."  (Psalms  ii.  2.)  In 
this  passage  is  set  forth  "  a  branch  of  Christ's  of- 
fice as  Savior  of  the  world;  namely,  his  mediato- 
rial office.  Having  died  as  an  atoning  sacrifice  and 
risen  again  from  the  dead,  he  w^as  now  to  make 
intercession  for  mankind  ;  and  in  virtue  and  on  ac- 
count of  what  he  had  done  and  suflered  he  was 
at  his  request  to  have  the  nations  for  his  inherit- 
ance, and  the  utterm.ost  parts  of  the  earth  for  his 
possessions.  He  was  to  become  supreme  Lord  in 
the  mediatorial  kingdom,  in  consequence  of  which 


382  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

he  sent  bis  apostles  throughout  the  habitable 
globe  to  preach  the  gospel  to  every  man/' 
(Clarke.) 

Because  the  heathen  and  uttermost  parts  of  the 
earth  have  been  given  to  Christ  in  the  sense  of  this 
passage,  that  by  no  means  proves  the  ulti- 
mate holiness  and.  salvation  of  all.  Judas  was 
given  to  Christ,  but  he  says  himself  that  he  lost 
him.  All  belong  to  Christ  now,  but  all  men  are 
not  now  saved;  therefore  giving  all  to  Christ  does 
not  mean  their  present  and  eternal  salvation. 
Christ  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all;  therefore 
the  world  belongs  to  him  by  redemption.  If  the 
giving  of  all  nations  to  Christ  means  their  salva- 
tion, then  all  nations  are  now  saved,  for  all  have 
been  given  to  Christ. 

"  And,  having  made  peace  through  the  blood  of 
his  cross,  by  him  to  reconcile  all  things  unto  him- 
self; by  him,  I  say,  whether  they  be  things  on  earth, 
or  things  in  heaven."  (Col.  i.  20.)  It  would  be 
a  little  difficult  for  Universalists  to  prove 
that  the  all  things  in  this  passage  means 
the  race  of  man, — nothing  more  and  noth- 
ing less.  In  the  verses  preceding  this  one 
tlie  same  words  occur  several  times.  '■''All  things 
were  created  by  him."  "  He  was  before  all  things^ 
"By  him  all  things  consist."  This  would  not  only 
include  the  human  race,  but  animals  and  vegetables 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  38-3 

as  well.  Do  Universalists  believe  that  all  tilings  in 
this  general  sense  are  to  be  reconciled  to  Christ? 
Certainly  not.  They  limit  the  phrase  all  fhivrjs  to 
mean  nothing  more  than  the  race  of  mankin<l. 

Let  us  see,  now,  if  the  apostle  will  not  help  u- 
to  understand  this  passage.  We  will  give  the  con- 
text: "And  you,  that  were  some  time  alienated  and 
enemies  in  your  mind  by  wicked  works,  yet  now 
hath  he  reconciled  in  the  body  of  his  Hesh  through 
death,  to  present  you  [who  have  been  reconciled] 
holy  and  unblamable  and  unreprovable  in  his 
sight:  if  ye  [who  have  been  reconciled]  continue 
in  the  faith  grounded  and  settled,  and  be  not  moved 
away  from  the  hope  of  the  gospel."  "  Thus  all 
the  argument  based  upon  the  unconditional  recon- 
ciliation of  men  to  God  vanishes  before  this  one 
declaration  of  the  apostle.  It  proves  not  only  that 
reconciliation  is  conditional,  but  it  also  proves  that 
men  who  are  reconciled,  in  order  to  be  presented 
holy  and  unblamable  and  unreprovable  in  the  sight 
of  God,  must  continue  in  the  faith." 

The  scope  of  the  apostle's  argument  is  this: 
man  had  fallen,  and  was  thereby  alienated  from 
God.  A  reconciliation  was  necessary  in  order  to 
make  peace  between  God  and  man ;  and  this  could 
not  be  accomplished  without  an  atonement  for 
sin ;  and  there  could  be  no  atonement  save  by  t?ie 
blood  of  the  cross.     The  atonement  being  made. 


384   «       UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

he  was  able  to  reconcile  all  to  himself.  And  all 
who  will  accept  of  salvation  will  be  reconciled 
and  presented  holy  and  unblamable  if  they  con- 
tinue in  that  state  of  reconciliation. 

Four  things  are  very  evident:  (1.)  The  phrase 
all  things  must  not  be  taken  in  a  literal  sense. 
(2.)  Thousands  live  and  die  in  an  unreconciled 
state.  (3.)  There  is  no  promise  in  this  or  any 
other  text  that  those  who  die  in  a  state  of  unrec- 
onciliation  will  ever  in  the  world  to  come  be  rec- 
onciled to  God.  (4.)  This  reconciliation  is  con- 
ditional, and  confined  to  this  world. 

"  For  the  Lord  will  not  cast  off  forever."  (Lam. 
iii.  31.)  Universalists  claim  that  ever  and  forever 
mean  limited  duration,  a  little  while.  Now  sup- 
pose that  we  try  their  own  interpretation  of  the 
word  forever.  The  passage  would  read  thus:  The 
Lord  will  not  cast  off'  for  a  limited  time  or  a  little 
while.  If,  then,  he  will  not  cast  off*  for  a  limited 
time,  he  will  cast  off  for  an  unlimited  time.  But 
it  is  evident  that  Universalists  when  they  quote 
this  text  mean  that  the  Lord  will  not  cast  off*  to 
all  eternity.  JSTow  I  will  quote  another  text:  "If 
thou  seek  him,  he  will  be  found  of  thee ;  but  if 
thou  forsake  him,  he  will  cast  thee  o^  forever.'''' 
(I.  Chron.  xxviii.  9.)  We  will  let  one  text  explain 
the  other,  so  far  as  the  meaning  of  the  word  for- 
ever is  concerned.  In  Lamentations  iii.  25  the  whole 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  385 

matter  is  explained.  "  The  Lord  is  good  unto  them 
that  wait  for  him,  to  the  soul  that  seeketh  him."  He 
may  chasten  his  beloved;  he  may  cause  grief;  yet 
he  will  not  ''cast  oft*  forever"  those  that  wait  for 
him,  and  seek  after  him.  But  what  does  he  say 
concerning  the  wicked,  such  as  will  not  wait  for 
him  nor  seek  after  him?  "Render  unto  them  a 
recompense,  O  Lord,  according  to  the  work  of 
their  hands.  Give  them  sorrow  of  heart,  thy 
curse  unto  them.  Persecute  and  destroy  them  in 
anorer  from  under  the  heavens  of  the  Lord." 
(Lam.  iii.  64-66.)  Universalists  do  not  often 
quote  these  verses. 

"  He  will  not  always  chide  :  neither  will  he  keep 
his  anger  for  ever."  (Psalms  ciii.  9.)  God  is  said 
to  be  angry  with  the  wicked  every  day.  But  if 
the  wicked  will  forsake  his  way  and  return  unto 
the  Lord  his  anger  will  cease,  for  he  will  abun- 
dantly pardon.  The  whole  matter  is  conditional. 
Yerse  10  reads :  "  He  hath  not  dealt  with  us  after 
our  sins;  nor  rewarded  us  according  to  our  in- 
iquities." But  why  not?  Yerse  12  explains  the 
whole  matter:  ''As  far  as  the  east  is  from  the 
•H'est,  so  far  hath  he  removed  our  transgressions 
from  us."  All  this  is  done;  but  for  whom?  Yerse 
11  says,  for  those  "that  fear  him."  God  will  not 
"keep  his  anger  for  ever"  toward  those  that  turn 
from  sin  and  fear  him.     This  text  is  fatal  to  Uni- 


386  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

versalism :  First,  because  it  teaches  that  salvation 
is  conditional;  and  second,  because  it  teaches  the 
doctrine  of  pardon,  both  of  which  they  deny.  Let 
us  compare  Universalism  with  the  Bible.  Mr. 
Guild,  on  page  378,  says,  ''  We  [Universalists]  are 
the  only  people  who  do  not  provide  some  way  for 
the  sinner  to  escape  the  just  punishment  of  his  sins. 
We  teach  that  the  punishment  of  sin  is  certain 
and  sure,  and  absolutely  unescapable  and  unavoid- 
able." Now  turn  to  the  Psalms  under  review, 
verses  10,  12:  "He  hath  not  dealt  with  us  after 
our  sins ;  nor  rewarded  us  according  to  our 
iniquities.  As  far  as  the  east  is  from  the  west,  so 
far  hath  he  removed  our  transgressions  from  us.'' 
Comment  is  unnecessary. 

"For  I  will  not  contend  forever,  neither  will  I 
be  always  wroth."  (Isaiah  Ivii.  16.)  With  whom 
will  the  Lord  not  contend  forever?  This  is  ex- 
plained in  the  fifteenth  verse.  He  will  revive  the 
spirit  of  the  the  humble  and  contrite  ones.  W^ith 
such  he  ^^will  not  contend  forever  f'  for  if  the  wick- 
ed will  forsake  his  way,  and  the  unrighteous  man 
his  thoughts,  and  will  return  unto  the  Lord,  he 
will  have  mercy  upon  him,  and  abundantly  pardon. 
But  the  perseveringly  wicked  and  impenitent 
will  have  no  share  in  the  pardon  and  peace  prom- 
ised. Yerse  twenty-one  says  :  "  There  is  no  peace, 
saith  my  God,  to  the  wicked."    "  When  the  prophet 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  387 

testifies  that  the  Lord  '  will  not  contend  forever/ 
he  refers  to  those  who  are  chastised,  and  who  are 
thereby  led  to  reformation,  hut  not  at  all  to  the 
wicked,  who  were '  Worse  and  worse,  deceiving  and 
being  deceived.' " 

"  Behold,  the  righteous  shall  be  recompensed  in 
the  earth :  much  more  the  wicked  and  the  sinner." 
(Prov.  xi.  31.)  Universalists  quote  this  text  to 
prove,  (1)  that  sinners  will  be  punished  for  their 
sins  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law,  and  (2)  that  that 
punishment  is  confined  to  this  world.  But  if  this 
text  is  to  be  taken  in  a  literal  and  absolute  sense,  it 
will  prove  too  much ;  for  it  declares  that  the  right- 
eous are  to  be  "  recompensed  in  the  earth :  much 
more  the  wicked."  Now  if  the  wicked  are  to  be 
much  more  recompensed  than  the  righteous,  that 
would  not  be  proportionate.  If  both  the  righteous 
and  the  wi-cked  are  to  be  rewarded  and  punished 
in  this  life,  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law,  how  is  it 
that  the  sinner  is  to  be  recompensed  much  more  F 
Would  it  not  prove  that  sinners  are  punished 
more  than  they  deserve? 

That  the  righteous  are  rewarded  on  earth  is  not 
questioned.  They  have  peace  of  conscience,  j 03^, 
and  comfort  by  believing  in  Jesus.  But  this  is  not 
all;  the  promise  is  that  they  shall  have  eternal  life, 
with  all  that  eternal  life  means.  That  the  wicked 
are  punished   while   on  earth  is   not   questioned. 


388  timVllRgAL   RESTORATION 

They  have  no  peace ;  they  are  like  the  troubled  sea 
But  they  are  not  punished  to  the  full  extent  of  the 
law ;  for  "  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned." 
They  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment. 
They  shall  be  tormented  forever  and  ever.  The 
rich  man,  after  he  was  dead  and  buried,  said,  '^  I 
am  tormented  in  these  flames." 

"Yerily  I  say  unto  thee,  Thou  shalt  by  no 
ineans  come  out  thence,  till  thou  hast  paid  the  ut- 
termost farthing."  (Matt.  v.  26.)  Universalists 
when  they  can  do  no  better  sometimes  resort  to 
this  text)  and  a  similar  passage  in  Luke  xii.  59,  to 
prove  the  ultimate  restoration  of  the  wicked.  But 
if,  as  they  claim,  the  righteous  are  fully  recom- 
pensed in  the  earth,  and  much  more  the  wicked, 
they  have  no  business  with  this  text.  Mr.  Thayer, 
page  304,  says:  "  This  is  7iot  a  state  of  probation, 
but  of  retribution ;  and  the  penalty  due  to  sin  is 
inflicted  here."  Mr.  Guild,  page  90,  says:  "We 
will  now  take  the  following  position:    Mankind 

ARE    REWARDED    AND    PUNISHED    IN     THIS     LIFE."      In 

the  course  of  his  argument,  on  the  same  page,  he 
says :  ^'  If,  therefore,  the  justice  of  God  is  an  active 
principle,  mankind  are  as  much  rewarded  and 
punished  here  as  they  ever  will  be."  Yet,  not- 
withstanding such  declarations  as  these,  they  will 
sometimes  resort  to  this  text  to  prove  that  the 
wicked  will  not  be  punished  eternally.      But  it  i^ 


CAREFULLY   EXAMINED.  389 

nothing  new  for  Universalists  to  contradict  them- 
&elves. 

It  will  be  proper  to  consider  a  few  points:  (1.) 
Can  weeping  and  wailing  in  hell  pay  to  divine 
justice  the  penalty  due  to  sin  ?  If  so,  then  Christ 
has  nothing  to  do  with  the  salvation  of  the  soul. 
Every  sinner  pays  his  own  debt,  and  comes  out 
without  any  thanks  to  God  for  pardon  or  to  Christ 
for  redemption.  (2.)  What  has  a  soul,  while  un- 
der condemnation,  to  pay  with  ?  (3.)  If  this  text 
is  to  be  taken  in  a  literal,  absolute  sense,  then  it 
would  prove  'endless  punishment.  (1.)  Because 
the  soul  is  in  prison,  and  can  not  come  out  until 
the  uttermost  farthing  is  paid.  (2.)  The  law  de- 
mands perfect  obedience,  Mark  that.  How,  then, 
can  a  soul  satisfy  the  law  for  past  ofienses,  and  at 
the  same  time  meet  the  present  claims  of  the  law? 
Now,  I  affirm  that  no  soul  can  ever  pay  one  far- 
thing of  past  indebtedness.  Perfect  obedience  will 
require  all  the  time  and  power  of  the  soul. 
It  is  therefore  utterly  impossible  to  render  satis- 
faction to  the  law  for  past  oft'enses,  and  at  the 
same  time  meet  the  present  claims  of  the  law. 

On  this  passage  Dr.  Clarke  makes  the  following 
just  remarks:  "This  text  has  been  considered  a 
proper  foundation  on  which  to  build  not  only  the 
doctrine  of  a  purgatory,  but  also  that  of  universal 
restoration.    But  the  most  unwarrantable  violence 


390  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

must  be  used  before  it  can  be  pressed  into  the 
service  of  either  of  the  above  antiscriptural  doc- 
trines. At  the  most,  the  text  can  only  be  consid- 
ered as  a  metaphorical  representation  of  the  pro- 
cedure of  the  great  Judge;  and  let  it  ever  be 
remembered  that  by  the  general  consent  of  all 
(except  the  basely  interested)  no  metaphor  is  ever 
to  be  produced  in  proof  of  any  doctrine.  In  the 
things  that  concern  our  eternal  salvation  we  need 
the  most  pointed  and  express  evidence  on  which  to 
establish  the  faith  of  our  souls." 

"  Look  unto  me,  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends 
of  the  earth :  for  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else. 
I  have  sworn  by  myself,  the  word  is  gone  out  of 
my  mouth  in  righteousness,  and  shall  not  return. 
That  unto  me  every  knee  shall  bow,  every  tongue 
shall  swear.  Surely  shall  one  say.  In  the  Lord 
have  I  righteousness  and  strength."  (Isaiah  xlv. 
22-24.)  The  very  first  sentence  in  this  passage 
destroys  the  whole  claim  of  Universalism.  "  Look 
unto  me."  Does  that  not  imply  conditions  ?  What 
of  those  that  will  not  look  unto  the  Lord?  Will 
they  be  saved  all  the  same  as  those  that  do  look  ? 
But  when  is  this  bowing  of  the  knee  and  universal 
subjugation  to  occur?  Is  it  in  this  world?  Cer- 
tainly not ;  for  millions  have  died  that  never 
bowed  the  knee  to  Christ.  Paul,  in  Rom.  xiv. 
10,  11,  asserts  that  it  is  to  take  place  in  the  judg- 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  391 

ment,  when  every  one  is  to  give  account  of 
himself  to  God.  All  are  to  stand  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ.  Paul  quotes  this  very  pas- 
sage from  Isaiah,  and  shows  that  this  bowing  and 
subjugation  is  to  occur  in  connection  with  the 
judgment.  But  does  it  follow  that  because  all 
will  bow  the  knee  to  Christ  that  therefore  all  will 
be  saved?  Devils  are  subject  to  Christ.  "Will 
they  be  saved  ?  But  it  is  said  in  this  connection 
that  those  w^ho  are  incensed  against  him  shall  be 
ashamed.  All  this,  mind  you,  is  to  take  place  in 
connection  with  this  bowing  and  confessing  at  the 
judgment.  Does  bowing  of  the  knee  and  being 
ashamed  mean  the  same  thing?  Paul  says, 
Kom.  ix.  33,  "Whosoever  believeth  on  him 
shall  not  be  ashamed."  It  follows  then  that  those 
who  will  be  ashamed  are  such  as  do  not  believe  on 
nim.  Jesus  says,  "  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned."  Every  text  that  is  quoted  by  Univer- 
salists,  when  rightly  understood,  is  an  argument 
against  their  theory.  This  passage  proves  that 
salvation  is  conditional,  which  they  deny.  It 
proves  that  those  who  look  to  the  Lord  will  be 
saved.  This  they  also  deny,  for  they  have  no  sal- 
vation in  their  theology.  To  look  to  the  Lord  for 
salvation,  when  men  must  be  punished  for  their 
sins  to  the  full  extent  of  the  law,  is  supreme  folly. 
"Kow  is  the  judgment  of  this  world;  now  shall 


392  UNIVERSAL     RESTORATION 

the  prince  of  this  world  be  cast  out."  (John  xii. 
31.)  It  is  well  understood  that  Universalists  deny 
the  doctrine  of  a  future  general  judgment.  It  is 
not  our  purpose  to  argue  that  question  at  length 
in  this  connection.  This  we  have  done  in  chapter 
fourteen  of  this  work.  But  as  they  use  this  text  to 
prove  their  theory  of  a  present  judgment,  I  think 
it  proper  to  consider  it.  This  passage  has  refer- 
ence to  his  approaching  death,  of  which  he  speaks 
in  the  context.  The  death  of  Christ,  which  was 
Boon  to  occur  (four  or  five  days),  would  break 
down  the  power  of  darkness;  the  prince  of  this 
world  would  be  defeated,  and  the  kingdom  of 
grace  set  up.  This  passage  can  not  mean  that 
then  was  the  time  when  the  whole  world  was  to 
be  judged.  This  our  Lord  fully  explains  in  verses 
47,  48,  where  he  says,  "If  any  man  hear  my 
words,  and  believe  not,  I  judge  him  not:  for  I 
came  not  to  jndge  the  world,  but  to  save  the 
world.  He  that  rejecteth  me,  and  receiveth  not 
my  words,  hath  one  that  judgeth  him :  the  word 
that  I  have  spoken,  the  same  shall  judge  him  in 
the  last  day."  Men  shall  be  judged  in  the  last  day 
according  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ.  The  judg- 
ment in  the  last  day  is  not  the  judgment  of  which 
Christ  speaks  in  verse  31.  There  he  says:  "I^ow 
is  the  judgment  of  this  world."  ISTow  shall  all 
men  be  judged  f     l^o;  that  is  not  it.      "^ow  shall 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  393 

the  prince  of  this  world  be  cast  out."  Who  is  the 
prince  of  this  world  ?  It  is  none  other  than  Satan, 
who  had  blinded  the  minds  of  the  people,  whose 
plans  and  purposes  were  about  to  be  defeated 
by  the  lifting  up  of  the  Son  of  man. 

In  John  ix.  39  we  lind  another  text  upon  which 
Universalists  lean  for  support :  "  For  judgment  I 
am  come  into  this  world."  But  this,  like  the  fore- 
going, has  no  reference  to  a  general  judgment. 
(1.)  Because  in  the  judgment  of  the  last  day  all 
are  to  be  judged.  We  must  all  stand  before  the 
judgment-seat  of  Christ;  the  dead,  small  and  great; 
those  who  had  lived,  and  those  who  would  live 
in  the  future.  (2.)  If  Christ  in  his  incarnation 
came  to  judge  the  world,  then  all  that  lived  before 
and  since  that  time  were  not  judged.  But  our 
Lord  speaks  of  a  judgment  in  the  last  day;  and 
Paul  reasoned  of  righteousness,  temperance,  and  a 
judgment  to  come,  until  Felix  trembled.  The 
meaning  of  the  text  is  this  :  "  I  am  come  to  man- 
ifest and  execute  the  just  judgment  of  God:  First, 
by  giving  sight  to  the  blind  and  light  to  the  gen- 
tiles who  sit  in  darkness;  and  second,  by  remov- 
ing the  true  light  from  those  who,  pretending  to 
make  a  proper  use  of  it,  only  abuse  the  mercy  of 
God.  In  a  w^ord,  salvation  shall  be  taken  away 
from  the  Jews,  because  they  reject  it,  and  the 
kingdom  of  God  shall  be  given  to  the  gentiles." 


394  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

This  interpretation  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  the 
language  of  the  text.  I  will  quote  the  whole  verse : 
"And  Jesus  said,  For  judgment  I  am  come  into 
this  world,  that  they  which  see  not  might  see;  and 
that  they  which  see  might  be  made  blind.'' 

"  For  he  must  reign,  till  he  hath  put  all  enemies 
under  his  feet."  (I.  Cor.  xv.  25.)  Does  this  mean 
that  all  who  are  put  under  his  feet  shall  be  made 
holy  and  happy?  The  twenty-sixth  verse  says: 
"  The  last  enemy  that  shall  be  destroyed  is  death." 
Is  not  death  one  of  the  "  all  enemies  f  Is  death 
to  be  made  holy  and  happy?  But  Paul,  in  Ephe- 
sians  i.  20-22,  says  that  all  things  are  now  under 
his  feet.  "  Which  he  wrought  in  Christ,  when  he 
raised  him  from  the  dead,  and  set  him  at  his  own 

right  hand  in  the  heavenly  places And 

hath  put  all  things  under  his  feet,"  Kow,  if  putting 
all  things  under  the  feet  of  Christ  means  to  save, 
or  make  happy,  then  all  are  now  saved,  for  all 
things  are  now  under  his  feet.  £Jven  devils  are  un- 
der him.  All  beings  and  things  are  subject  to  him, 
"whether  they  be  thrones,  or  dominions,  or  princi- 
palities, or  powers."  (Col.  i.  16-18 ;  ii.  10.)  But 
all  are  not  now  holy ;  therefore  putting  under  the 
feet  of  Christ  does  not  mean  to  make  either  holy 
or  happy. 

"  And  he  shall  send  Jesus  Christ,  which  before 
was  preached  unto  you :  whom  the  heaven  must 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  395 

receive  until  the  times  of  restitution  of  all  things, 
which  God  hath  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  all  his 
holy  prophets  since  the  world  began."  (Acts  iii. 
2Q,  21.)  The  whole  force  of  this  passage  turns  on 
the  meaning  of  the  phrase  "  restitution  of  allthings.'" 
Does  it  mean  to  make  all  things  holy?  or  that  a?^ 
things  will  be  saved  in  heaven?  Certainly  not. 
There  is  a  text  in  Matthew  xvii.  11  which  may  as- 
sist in  understanding  this  passage :  "  And  Jesus 
answered  and  said  unto  them,  Elias  truly  shall  first 
come,  and  restore  all  things.''  Were  all  men  made 
holy  when  John  the  Baptist  came  ?  In  the  twen- 
ty-second and  twenty-third  verses  of  the  third 
chapter  of  Acts,  Peter  explains  the  whole  matter : 
"  For  Moses  truly  said  unto  the  fathers,  A  prophet 
shall  the  Lord  your  God  raise  up  unto  you  of  your 
brethren,  like  unto  me;  him  shall  ye  hear  in  all 
things  whatsoever  he  shall  say  unto  you.  And  it 
shall  come  to  pass,  that  every  soul,  which  will  not 
hear  that  Prophet,  shall  be  destroyed  from  among 
the  people." 

From  this  it  is  very  evident  that  the  restitution 
of  all  things  did  not  mean  the  salvation  of  all 
men,  unless  it  can  be  made  to  appear  that  restitu- 
tion and  destroy  mean  the  same  thing.  For  Peter 
says  plainly  that  every  soul  that  would  not  hearthat 
prophet  (Christ)  should  be  destroyed  from  among 
the  people.      All  did   not  and  would  not  hear 


396  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

Christ.  The  vast  majority  rejected  him,  and  they 
Avere  to  be  destroyed.  It  is  enough  for  our  pres- 
ent purpose  to  show  that  the  restitution  of  all 
things  does  not  mean  the  salvation  of  all  men. 
This  we  have  done.  If  our  limits  would  permit 
we  might  give  at  some  length  the  true  scriptural 
idea  of  the  restitution  of  all  things.  But  enough 
has  been  said  to  show  that  this  text  does  not  teach 
the  doctrine  of  Universalism. 

"  That  they  all  may  be  one ;  as  thou,  Father, 
art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also  may  be  one 
in  us :  that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou  hast 
sent  me."  (John  xvii.  21.)  Universalists  claim 
that  because  Christ  prayed  for  all  that  all  will  be 
saved,  he  could  not  pray  in  vain.  But  Judas 
was  among  the  many  for  whom  Christ  prayed. 
Was  he  saved?  Jesus  said  he  was  lost.  That 
prayer  was  offered  more  than  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago,  and  has  not  up  to  this  time  been  an- 
swered. Since  that  prayer  was  offered  millions 
have  died  that  did  not  believe  in  Christ.  When  and 
where  will  they  believe  on  him  ?  Mark  the  lan- 
guage :  he  did  not  pray  that  hell  might  believe  on 
him,  but  that  the  world  (/cosmos)  might  believe  on 
him.  If  any  died  before  Christ  offered  that  pray- 
er, or  if  any  have  died  since  that  did  not  believe 
in  Jesus,  then  the  word  world,  from  kosmos,  must 
mean  not  only  this  world  but  the  world  to  come. 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  397 

In  this  prayer  Christ  expressed  his  desire,  but 
no  more  strongly  than  he  did  when  he  wept  over 
Jerusalem;  and  yet  they  perished.  The  burden 
of  our  Lord's  prayer  was  for  the  unity  of  his 
church — that  they  all  may  be  one — "  may  be  one 
in  us:  that  the  v^oM  \_Jwsmos]  may  believe  that 
thou  has  sent  me."  ^^  May  believe,'' not  shall  be- 
lieve. It  was  the  desire  of  Christ  that  all  should  be- 
lieve on  him  while  he  was  here ;  but  they  would  not. 
It  is  the  desire  of  Christ  that  all  should  believe 
on  him  now ;  but  they  do  not.  Before  Universal- 
ists  can  make  anything  out  of  this  text  they  must 
show  from  the  words  of  God  that  those  who  have 
died  in  sin  and  unbelief  will  in  the  world  to  come 
believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  be  saved. 
There  is  no  such  text  in  the  Bible — not  one. 

"Speak  ye  comfortably  to  Jerusalem,  and  cry 
unto  her,  that  her  warfare  is  accomplished,  that 
her  iniquity  is  pardoned :  for  she  hath  received 
of  the  Lord's  hand  double  for  all  her  sins."  (Isa. 
xl.  2.)  A  word  or  two  on  this  text  will  be  suffi- 
cient to  show  that  Universalists  have  no  right  to 
quote  it  in  proof  of  their  theory.  They  believe 
and  teach  that  men  are  punished  for  their  sins. 
Mr.  Thayer,  page  313,  says,  '-The  sin  is  punished- 
and  forgiven;  the  penalty  of  transgression  is  in- 
flicted; and  then  the  sinner  is  forgiven,  or  deliv- 
ered from  his  evil  course."     IlTow  let  us  examine 


398  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

this  passage  according  to  Universalism.  If  we 
say  that  the  receiving  double  for  all  her  sins,  as  it 
occurs  in  the  text,  relates  to  punishment  for  sin  it 
would  prove  too  much.  If  God  did  not  pardon 
them  until  they  had  received  double  the  amount  of 
punishment  due  for  all  their  sins,  then  they  were 
not  forgiven  upon  receipt  of  the  full  amount  of 
punishment.  And  that  would  not  be  just.  Uui- 
versalists  themselves  would  hardly  be  willing  to 
receive  double  punishment  for  all  their  sins. 

"Have  we  not  all  one  Father?  hath  not  one  God 
created  us?"  (Mai.  ii.  10.)  If  because  God  is  the 
Father  of  us  all,  all  will  be  made  holy  and  happy, 
for  the  very  same  reason  all  are  holy  and  happy 
now,  for  God  is  as  much  the  Father  of  all  now  as 
he  ever  will  be.  God  is  the  Father  of  all  because 
he  has  created  us  all.  But  there  is  a  higher  sense 
in  which  the  fatherhood  of  God  maybe  considered. 
Paul  says,  Rom.  viii.  14,  "  We  are  all  the  children 
of  God  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus."  '  Is  God  the  Fa- 
ther of  all  in  this  sense  ?  Are  all  the  children  of 
God  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus?  Certainly  not;  for 
Jesus  said,  John  viii.  44,  '^Ye  are  of  your  father 
the  devil."  God  was  the  Father  of  the  Sodomites  ; 
nevertheless,  Jiide  says  they  are  suffering  the  venge- 
ance of  eternal  fire.  God  is  the  Father  of  us  all. 
But  Paul  declares,  "Vengeance  is  mine,  I  will  re- 
pay, saith  the  Lord."  Again  he  says,  "  It  is  a  feai- 
ful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  living  God." 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  399 

All  who  believe  the  Bible  at  all,  believe  that 
God  is  the  Father  of  us  all  in  the  sense  of  creation ; 
and  this  is  the  sense  in  which  the  prophet  uses  it, 
for  he  immediately  adds,  "  Hath  not  one  God  cre- 
ated us?"  But  this  is  very  far  from  proving  the 
ultimate  holiness  and  happiness  of  all.  God  was 
as  much  the  Father  of  the  rich  man,  spoken  of  in 
Luke  xvi.,  as  he  was  the  Father  of  Abraham ;  yet 
they  are  described  as  occupying  positions  widely 
different. 

"  For  in  the  resurrection  they  neither  marry,  nor 
are  given  in  marriage,  but  are  as  the  angels  of  God 
in  heaven."  (Matt.  xxii.  30.)  This  is  quoted  by 
Universalists  to  prove  that  all  will  be  made  holy 
and  happy  in  the  resurrection.  If  there  were  no 
other  text  in  the  Bible  that  treated  on  the  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection,  there  would  be  some  force  in 
their  argument  based  on  this  passage.  But  there 
are  other  passages  that  must  be  considered  in  con- 
nection with  this.  The  Bible  must  explain  itself. 
iN'ow  we  will  turn  to  Luke  xx.  35,  36,  where  this 
same  discourse  of  the  Savior  is  reported.  "  But 
they  which  shall  be  accounted  icorthy  to  obtain  that 
world,  and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  neither 
marry,  nor  are  given  in  marriage :  neither  can  they 
die  any  more:  for  they  are  equal  unto  the  angels.'' 
Who  are  to  obtain  that  world?  and  who  are  to  be 


400  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

equal  to  the  angels  ?  Jesus  says,  "  They  which  shall 
be  accounted  worthy  J''  If  this  text  means  anything 
at  all,  it  means  that  some  will  not  be  accounted 
worthy,  and  therefore  will  not  be  as  the  angels  of 
God  in  heaven.  This  is  positively  taught  by  our 
Lord  in  John  v.  28,  29  :  "  Marvel  not  at  this :  for 
the  hour  is  coming,  in  the  which  all  that  are  in  the 
graves  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth  ; 
they  that  have  done  good,  unto  the  resurrection  of 
life ;  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resur- 
rection of  damnation."  Will  those  who  come 
forth  to  damnation  be  as  the  angels  of  God  in 
heaven  ? 

"  And  all  things  are  of  God,  who  hath  reconcil- 
ed us  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  hath  given 
to  us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation;  to- wit,  that 
God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world  unto 
himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto  them ; 
and  hath  committed  unto  us  the  word  of  reconcil- 
iation." (II.  Cor.  V.  18,  19.)  Two  things  should 
be  considered.  (1.)  What  are  the  means  of  this 
reconciliation  ?  Paul  says  God  hath  given  us  the 
''' ministry  of  reconciliation."  In  the  nineteenth 
verse  he  calls  it  "the  word  of  reconciliation."  In 
the  twentieth  verse  Paul,  as  an  embassador,  goes  out 
with  this  word  and  says,  "  We  pray  3^ou  in  Christ's 
stead,  be  ye  reconciled  to  God."  ^N'ow  if  Christ 
has  unconditionally  reconciled  the  world  unto  him- 


CAREFLLLY  EXAMINED.  401 

self,  what  was  the  need  of  the  apostle  going  out 
and  urging  the  people  to  be  reconciled  ?  (2.)  When, 
where,  and  how  will  those  who  die  unreconciled 
be  reconciled  to  God?  Are  there  any  other  means 
of  being  reconciled  to  God  besides  the  ministry 
of  reconciliation  ?  Will  the  gospel  be  preached  in 
eternity  ? 

I  have  now  examined  the  principal  texts  usually 
relied  upon  by  Universalists  to  prove  their  doctrine. 
There  are  other  passages  which  they  press  into 
their  service,  but  they  no  more  prove  the  ultimate 
holiness  of  all  men  than  those  I  have  examined. 
The  whole  theory  of  Universalism  is  false,  danger- 
ous, and  pernicious.  Any  system  of  religion  that 
starts  out  by- making  God  the  author  of  sin,  and 
then  denies  the  doctrine  of  depravity  and  rejects 
the  divinity  of  Christ  and  the  doctrine  of  vicari- 
ous atonement,  is  false  in  all  its  parts.  It  is  an- 
other religion,  and  makes  the  Bible  an  unmeaning 
book. 

If  it  were  all  of  life  to  live  here,  men  could  pos- 
sibly afford  to  be  deceived.  But  there  is  a  here- 
after— an  eternity  of  bliss  and  an  eternity  of  woe. 
As  a  man  sows  in  time,  so  shall  he  reap  in  eterni- 
ty. Oh,  eternity  1  that  dreadful  word, — "  existence 
without  bound  or  dimension;"  "to-day,  without 
yesterday  or  to-morrow."  Who  can  comprehend 
the  meaning  of  the  words,  '' forever  and  cverf*    A 

26 


402  UNIVERSAL  RESTORATION 

parisli  in  Savoy  is  said  to  have  tlie  following  pla- 
card in  every  house  :  *' Understand  well  the  force 
of  the  words:  A  God,  a  moment,  an  eternity.  A 
God  who  sees  thee,  a  moment  which  flees  from 
thee,  an  eternity  which  awaits  thee ;  a  God  whom 
you  serve  so  ill,  a  moment  of  which  you  so  little 
profit,  an  eternity  which  you  hazard  so  rashly." 

Universalism  is  a  delusion.  It  promises  an  end- 
less life  of  bliss  to  all  men  alike,  whether  they  be 
saints  or  sinners.  The  atheist,  the  deist,  the  drunk- 
ard, and  murderer  who  die  as  they  live  will  be 
crowned  in  glory  all  the  same  as  those  who  believe 
and  obey  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.  Be  not  de- 
ceived by  this  siren  song  of  peace. 

Jesus  Christ  is  the  world's  Redeemer.  "  "Who- 
soever believeth  in  him  shall  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life."  "  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned.''  In  the  day  of  tempest  and  storm  the 
Lord  Jesus  will  be  a  refuge  and  shelter  to  all  who 
put  their  trust  in  him. 

Dear  reader,  I  have  presented  to  you  the  teach- 
ings of  Universalists  in  their  own  language;  also 
the  declarations  of  God  in  his  own  words.  Let  me 
beseech  you  to  remember  that  he  who  spoke  as  never 
man  spoke  uttered  these  impressive  words :  "There- 
fore 'Whosoever  heareth  these  sayings  of  mine,  and 
doeth  them,  I  will  liken  him  unto  a  wise  man, 
which  built  his  house  upon  a  rock :  and  the  rain 


CAREFULLY  EXAMINED.  403 

descended,  and  the  floods  came,  and  tlie  winds 
blew,  and  beat  upon  that  house ;  and  it  fell  not : 
tor  it  was  founded  upon  a  rock.  And  every  one 
that  heareth  these  sayings  of  mine,^^nd  doeth  them 
not,  shall  be  likened  unto  a  foolish  man,  which 
built  his  house  upon  the  sand :  and  the  rain  de- 
scended, and  the  floods  came,  and  the  winds  blew, 
and  beat  upon  that  house ;  and  it  fell :  and  great 
was  the  fall  of  it."     (Matt.  vii.  24-27.) 


DATE  DUE 


GAYLORD 


PRINTED  IN  U.S.A. 


